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.


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.

Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest


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.

Interview With George Stephanopoulos on ABC's Good Morning America


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.


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.


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.

Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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...

Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files


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...


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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...


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?


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?


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.


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.


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...


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.


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.


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.


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?


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.

Interview with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union


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.


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.


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?


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.

Interview With Paul W. Smith of WWDB Radio, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


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.


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.

Interview With Gerd Helbig of ZDF, German Television


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?


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.

Interview With Kensuke Okoshi of NHK Japan


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.


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.


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.

Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News