{"id": 5039, "text": "the Iranian hostage crisis, the attacks on our Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut, the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103, the truck bombing of the World Trade Center, the attack on Khobar Towers, the bombing of our Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the strike on the USS Cole. And then came September the 11th, 2001, when 19 men from the Middle East carried out the worst attack on the United States since the strike on Pearl Harbor 67 years ago this weekend. In the space of a single morning, 9/11 etched a sharp dividing line in our history. We realized that we are in a struggle with fanatics pledged to our destruction. We saw that conditions of repression and despair on the other side of the world could bring suffering and death to our own streets. With these new realities in mind, America reshaped our approach to the Middle East. We made clear that we will defend our friends, our interests, and our people against any hostile attempt to dominate the Middle East, whether by terror, blackmail, or the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. We have carried out this new strategy by following three overriding principles. First, we took the offense against the terrorists overseas. We are waging a relentless campaign to break up extremist networks and deny them safe havens. As part of that offensive, we pledged to strengthen our partnership with every nation that joins in the fight against terror. We deepened our security cooperation with allies like Jordan and Egypt, and with our friends in the gulf. Saudi Arabia, long a breeding ground for radicalism, has become a determined partner in the fight against terror, killing or capturing hundreds of Al Qaida operatives in the Kingdom. We dramatically expanded counterterrorism ties with partners in North Africa. And we left no doubt that America would stand by our closest ally in the Middle East, the State of Israel. Second, we made clear that hostile regimes must end their support for terror and their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, or face the concerted opposition of the world. This was the approach we took in Iraq. It is true, as I have said many times, that Saddam Hussein was not connected to the 9/11 attacks. But the decision to remove Saddam from power cannot be viewed in isolation from 9/11.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5040, "text": "In a world where terrorists armed with box cutters had just killed nearly 3,000 of our people, America had to decide whether we could tolerate a sworn enemy that acted belligerently, that supported terror, and that intelligence agencies around the world believed had weapons of mass destruction. It was clear to me it was clear to members of both political parties and to many leaders around the world that after 9/11, that was a risk we could not afford to take. So we went back to the United Nations Security Council, which unanimously passed Resolution 1441 calling on Saddam Hussein to disclose, disarm, or face serious consequences. With this resolution, we offered Saddam Hussein a final chance to comply with the demands of the world. And when he refused to resolve the issue peacefully, we acted with a coalition of nations to protect our people and liberated 25 million Iraqis. When Saddam regimes fell when Saddam's regime fell, we refused to take the easy option and install a friendly strongman in his place. Even though it required enormous sacrifice, we stood by the Iraqi people as they elected their own leaders and built a young democracy. When the violence reached its most dire point, pressure to withdraw reached its height. Yet failure in Iraq would have unleashed chaos, widened the violence, and allowed the terrorists to gain a new safe haven, a fundamental contradiction to our vision for the Middle East. So we adopted a new strategy and deployed more troops to secure the Iraqi people. When the surge met its objective, we began to bring our troops home under the policy of return on success. Yesterday, building on the gains made by the surge, the democratic Government of Iraq approved two agreements with the United States that formalize our diplomatic, economic, and security ties and set a framework for the drawdown of American forces as the fight in Iraq nears its successful end. After 9/11, we also confronted Libya over its weapons of mass destruction. The leader of Libya made a wise choice. In 2003, Colonel Qadhafi announced that he would abandon his weapons of mass destruction program. He concluded that the interests of his people would be best served by improving relations with America, and Libya turned over its nuclear centrifuges and other deadly equipment to the United States. The defeat of Saddam also appears to have changed the calculation of Iran. According to our intelligence community, the regime in Tehran had started a nuclear weapons program in the late 1980s, and they halted a key part of that program in 2003.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5041, "text": "America recognized that the most effective way to pursue persuade Iran to remove its nuclear weapons renounce its nuclear weapons ambitions was to have partners at our side, so we supported an international effort led by our allies in Europe. This diplomacy yielded an encouraging result when Iran agreed to suspend its uranium enrichment. Sadly, after the election of President Ahmadi-nejad, Iran reversed course and announced it would begin enriching again. Since then, we have imposed tough sanctions through United Nations resolutions. We and our partners have offered Iran diplomatic and economic incentives to suspend enrichment. We have promised to support a peaceful civilian nuclear program. For the safety of our people and the peace of the world, America will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. Third, America identified the lack of freedom in the Middle East as a principal cause of the threats coming from the region. We concluded that if the region continued on the path it was headed, if another generation grew up with no hope for the future and no outlet to express its views, the Middle East would continue to simmer in resentment and export violence. To stop this from happening, we have resolved to help the region steer itself toward a better course of freedom and dignity and hope. We are engaged in a battle with the extremists that is broader than a military conflict and broader than a law enforcement operation. We are engaged in an ideological struggle. And to advance our security interests and moral interests, America is working to advance freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and terror. As part of this effort, we are pressing nations across the region, including our friends, to trust their people with greater freedom of speech and worship and assembly. We are giving strong support to young democracies. We are standing with reformers and dissidents and human rights activists across the region. Through new efforts like the Middle East peace partnership initiative and the Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative, we are supporting the rise of vibrant civil societies. We are also advancing a broader vision that includes economic prosperity, quality health care and education, and women's rights. We have negotiated new free trade agreements in the region, supported Saudi Arabia's accession to the World Trade Organization, and proposed a new Middle East free trade area. We have signed Millennium Challenge agreements with Jordan and Morocco to grant American assistance in return for anticorruption measures, free market policies, and investments in health and education.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5042, "text": "We are training Middle Eastern schoolteachers, translating children's school books into Arabic, and helping young people get visas to study here in the United States. We are encouraging Middle Eastern women to get involved in politics and to start their own businesses and take charge of their health through wise practices like breast cancer screening. Efforts like these extend hope to the corners of despair, and in this work we have had a lot of help, but no finer ambassador of good will than my wife, Laura Bush. Finally, to advance all the principles that I have outlined supporting our friends and pressuring our adversaries and extending freedom America has launched a sustained initiative to help bring peace to the Holy Land. At the heart of this effort is the vision of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. I was the first ENTITY to call for a Palestinian state and sup-port and to build support for the two-state solution has been a top priority of my administration. To earn the trust of Israeli leaders, we made it clear that no Palestinian state would be born of terror, we backed Prime Minister Sharon's courageous withdrawal from Gaza, and we supported his decision to build a security fence, not as a political border but to protect the people from terror. To help the Palestinian people achieve the state they deserve, we insisted on Palestinian leadership that rejects terror and recognizes Israel's right to exist. Now that this leadership has emerged, we are strongly supporting its efforts to build institutions of a vibrant democratic state. With good advice from leaders like former Prime Minister Tony Blair and Generals Jones, Dayton, Fraser, and Selva, the Palestinians are making progress toward capable security forces, a functioning legal system, Government Ministries that deliver services without corruption, and a market economy. In all our efforts to promote a two-state solution, we have included Arab leaders from across the region, because we fully understand that their support will be essential for the creation of a state and lasting peace. Last fall at Annapolis, Israeli, Palestinian, and Arab leaders came together at an historic summit. President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert agreed to launch direct negotiations on a peace agreement. Nations around the globe, including many in the Arab world, pledged to support them. The negotiations since Annapolis have been determined and substantial. Secretary Rice has encouraged both sides by hosting a series of trilateral meetings. And while the Israelis and Palestinians have not yet produced an agreement, they have made important progress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5043, "text": "As they stated to the Quartet, they have laid a new foundation of trust for the future. On this issue, and on our overall approach to the Middle East these past 8 years, America has been ambitious in vision, we have been bold in action, and we have been firm in purpose. Our aim was to help a troubled region take the difficult first steps on the long journey to freedom and prosperity and hope. Some have called this idealistic, and no doubt it is. Yet it is the only practical way to help the people of the Middle East realize the dignity and justice they deserve. And it is the only practical way to protect the United States of America in the long term. As with any large undertaking, these efforts have not always gone according to plan, and in some areas we have fallen short of our hopes. For example, the fight in Iraq has been longer and more costly than expected. The reluctance of entrenched regimes to open their political systems has been disappointing. Despite these frustrations and disappointments, the Middle East in 2008 is a freer, more hopeful, and more promising place than it was in 2001. For the first time in nearly three decades, the people of Lebanon are free from Syria's military occupation. Libya's nuclear weapons equipment is locked away in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Places like the UAE and Bahrain are emerging as centers of commerce. The region the regime in Iran is facing greater pressure from the international community than ever before. Terrorist organizations like Al Qaida have failed decisively in their attempts to take over nations; they are increasingly facing ideological rejection in the Arab world. Iraq has gone from an enemy of America to a friend of America, from sponsoring terror to fighting terror, and from a brutal dictatorship to a multireligious, multiethnic constitutional democracy. Instead of the Iraq we would see if a Saddam Hussein were in power an aggressive regime vastly enriched by oil, defying the United Nations, bullying its Arab neighbors, threatening Israel, and pursuing a nuclear arms race with Iran we see an Iraq emerging peacefully with its neighbors, welcoming Arab ambassadors back to Baghdad, and showing the Middle East a powerful example of a moderate, prosperous, free nation. The most vexing problem in the region the Israeli-Palestinian conflict there is now greater international consensus that at any point in modern memory. Israelis, Palestinians, and Arabs recognize the creation of a peaceful, democratic Palestinian state is in their interests.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5044, "text": "And through the Annapolis process, they started down a path that will end with two states living side by side in peace. In fits and starts, political and economic reforms are advancing across the Middle East. Women have run for office in several nations and been named to important Government positions in Bahrain and Oman and Qatar, the UAE and Yemen. Several nations have opened up private universities, and Internet use has risen sharply. Across the region, conversations about freedom and reform are growing louder. Expectations about government responsiveness are rising, and people are defying the condescending view that the culture of the Middle East is unfit for freedom. Iran and Syria continue to sponsor terror. Iran's uranium enrichment remains a major threat to peace. Many in the region still live under oppression. Yet the changes of the past 8 years herald the beginning of something historic and new. At long last, the Middle East is closing a chapter of darkness and fear and opening a new one written in the language of possibility and hope. For the first time in generations, the region represents something more than a set of problems to be solved or the site of energy resources to be developed. A free and peaceful Middle East will represent a source of promise and home of opportunity and a vital contributor to the prosperity of the world. Those who ask what this future will look like need only look around. We see the new story of the Middle East in Iraqis waving ink-stained fingers, with Lebanese taking to streets in the Cedar Revolution. We see it in women taking their seats in elected Parliaments and bloggers telling the world their dreams. We see it in the skyscrapers rising above Abu Dhabi and liv-ing and thriving Middle Eastern businesses that are now connected to the global economy. We see it in a Saudi king sponsoring an interfaith dialogue, Palestinian reformers fighting corruption and terror, and Israelis who love their ancient land, but want to live in peace. These are striking images, and they do point the way to a brighter future. I believe the day will come when the map of the Middle East shows a peaceful, secure Israel beside a peaceful and democratic Palestine. I believe the day will come when people from Cairo and Riyadh to Baghdad and Beirut to Damascus and Tehran live in free and independent societies, bound together by the ties of diplomacy and tourism and trade.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5049, "text": "It is not often that a president comes as a substitute speaker. I understand that the Southern Legislative Conference--could not afford Billy here. I was going to go by Plains on this trip, but I could not get a room there. I am going to go to Yazoo City tonight and then to New Orleans later on. I am very grateful to be here as president. I have learned a lot in this first 6 months. When I got to Washington and sought advice, someone said, Just act like you are a president and treat Congress like the Georgia Legislature. Very quickly I realized that the Congress was treating me like I was still Governor of Georgia, but now, with the help of a great number of friends in the Congress, we have formed a kind of relationship that ought to exist between the White House and our Nation's Capitol. I think there is a genuine sense of sharing of responsibility and the burden of government, and you are a part of that circle of leaders in the State legislature and the Governors' offices, who join in with the president, the Congress, and others in making sure that our government works. I am also proud to be with you today where two great rivers come together, as they say in Charleston, to form the Atlantic Ocean. This is one of our Nation's most gracious cities. And I want to talk to you today about the hopes and problems that we as southerners and as Americans share together. I feel a special kinship with your State legislators. For 4 years I was a member of the Georgia Senate, and I still prize State government not only for the talents of those who work in it but, as Fritz Hollings says, for the closeness to the people it represents. Our Southern States have a proud tradition of local, independent government, and now you are the heirs of that tradition. But we in the South have also felt, perhaps more directly than many others, some of the rapid changes that have taken place in this modern age. More and more our own lives are shaped by events in other cities, decisions in other States, tensions in other parts of the world. And as Americans we cannot overlook the way that our fate is bound to that of other nations. This interdependence stretches from the health of our economy, through war and peace, to the security of our own energy supplies. It is a new world in which we cannot afford to be narrow in our vision, limited in our foresight, or selfish in our purpose.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5050, "text": "When I took office almost exactly 6 months ago, our Nation was faced with a series of problems around the world--in southern Africa, the Middle East, in our relationships with our NATO allies, and on such tough questions as nuclear proliferation, negotiations with our former adversaries, a Panama Canal treaty, human rights, world poverty. We have openly and publicly addressed these and other many difficult and controversial issues--some of which had been either skirted or postponed in the past. As I pointed out in a recent press conference, a period of debate, disagreement, probing was inevitable. Our goal has not been to reach easy or transient agreements, but to find solutions that are meaningful, balanced, and lasting. Now, a president has a responsibility to present to the people of this Nation reports and summations of complex and important matters. I feel more secure as president making decisions if I know that either the most difficult, the most complex questions that face me have been understood and debated by you and understood and debated by the Congress. In the past I think our Nation's leaders have been guilty of making decisions in secret. And even when the decision turns out to be the fight one, it makes the president, the Secretary of State speak with a weak voice when they speak alone. Today, I want to discuss a vitally important aspect of our foreign relations, the one that may most directly shape the chances for peace for us and for our children. I would like to spell out my view of what we have done and where we are going in our relations with the Soviet Union and to reaffirm the basic principles of our national policy. I do not have any apology for talking about foreign affairs at a southern legislative conference, because foreign affairs and those difficult decisions ought never to be made with a concept that we can abandon common sense and the sound judgment and the constructive influence of the American people. For decades, the central problems of our foreign policy revolved around antagonism between two coalitions, one headed by the United States and the other headed by the Soviet Union. Our national security was often defined almost exclusively in terms of military competition with the Soviet Union. This competition is still critical, because it does involve issues which could lead to war. But however important this relationship of military balance, it cannot be our sole preoccupation to the exclusion of other world issues which also concern us both.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5051, "text": "Even if we succeed in relaxing tensions with the U.S.S.R., we could still awake one day to find that nuclear weapons have been spread to dozens of other nations who may not be as responsible as are we. Or we could struggle to limit the conventional arsenals of our two nations, to reduce the danger of war, only to undo our efforts by continuing without constraint to export armaments around the world. As two industrial giants, we face long-term, worldwide energy crises. Whatever our political differences, both of us are compelled to begin conserving world energy and developing alternatives to oil and gas. Despite deep and continuing differences in world outlook, both of us should accept the new responsibilities imposed on us by the changing nature of international relations. Europe and Japan rose from the rubble of war to become great economic powers. Communist parties and governments have become more widespread and more varied and, I might say, more independent from one another. Newly independent nations emerged into what has now become known as the Third World. Their role in world affairs is becoming increasingly significant. Both the United States and the Soviet Union have learned that our countries and our people, in spite of great resources, are not all-powerful. We have learned that this world, no matter how technology has shrunk distances, is nevertheless too large and too varied to come under the sway of either one or two super powers. And what is perhaps more important of all, we have, for our part, learned, all of us, this fact, these facts in a spirit not of increasing resignation, but of increasing maturity. I mention these familiar changes with which you are familiar because I think that to understand today's Soviet-American relationship, we must place it in perspective, both historically and in terms of the overall global scene. The whole history of Soviet-American relations teaches us that we will be misled if we base our long-range policies on the mood of the moment, whether that mood be euphoric or grim. All of us can remember times when relations seemed especially dangerous and other times when they seemed especially bright. We have crossed those peaks and valleys before. And we can see that, on balance, the trend in the last third of a century has been positive. The profound differences in what our two governments believe about freedom and power and the inner lives of human beings, those differences are likely to remain; and so are other elements of competition between the United States and the Soviet Union.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5052, "text": "That competition is real and deeply rooted in the history and the values of our respective societies. But it is also true that our two countries share many important overlapping interests. Our job---my job, your job--is to explore those shared interests and use them to enlarge the areas of cooperation between us on a basis of equality and mutual respect. As we negotiate with the Soviet Union, we will be guided by a vision of a gentler, freer, and more bountiful world. But we will have no illusions about the nature of the world as it really is. The basis for complete mutual trust between us does not yet exist. Therefore, the agreements that we reach must be anchored on each side in enlightened self-interest-what is best for us, what is best for the Soviet Union. That is why we search for areas of agreement where our real interests and those of the Soviets coincide. We want to see the Soviets further engaged in the growing pattern of international activities designed to deal with human problems--not only because they can be of real help but because we both should be seeking for a greater stake in the creation of a constructive and peaceful world order. When I took office, many Americans were growing disillusioned with detente---President Ford had even quit using the word, and by extension, people were concerned with the whole course of our relations with the Soviet Union. Also, and perhaps more seriously, world respect for the essential rightness of American foreign policy had been shaken by the events of a decade---Vietnam, Cambodia, CIA, Watergate. At the same time, we were beginning to regain our sense of confidence and our purpose and unity as a nation. In this situation, I decided that it was time for honest discussions about international issues with the American people. I felt that it was urgent to restore the moral bearings of American foreign policy. And I felt that it was important to put the U.S. and Soviet relationship, in particular, on a more reciprocal, realistic, and, ultimately, more productive basis for both nations. It is not a question of a hard policy or of a soft policy, but of a clear-eyed recognition of how most effectively to protect our own security and to create the kind of international order that I have just described. We have looked at the problems in Soviet-American relations in a fresh way, and we have sought to deal with them boldly and constructively with proposals intended to produce concrete results.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5053, "text": "I'd like to point out just a few of them. In the talks on strategic arms limitations, the SALT talks, we advanced a comprehensive proposal for genuine reductions, limitations, and a freeze on new technology which would maintain balanced strategic strength. We have urged a complete end to all nuclear tests, and these negotiations are now underway. Agreement here could be a milestone in U.S.-Soviet relations. We are working together toward a ban on chemical and biological warfare and the elimination of inventories of these destructive materials. We have proposed to curb the sales and transfers of conventional weapons to other countries, and we have asked France, Britain, and other countries to join with us in this effort. We are attempting to halt the threatening proliferation of nuclear weapons among the nations of the world which do not yet have the ability to set off nuclear explosives. We have undertaken serious negotiations on arms limitations in the Indian Ocean. We have encouraged the Soviets to sign, along with us, the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which would ban the introduction of nuclear weapons into the southern part of the Western Hemisphere. We have begun regular consultations with the Soviet leaders as cochairmen of the prospective Geneva conference to promote peace in the Middle East. We and our allies are negotiating together with the Soviet Union and their allies in the Warsaw Pact nations to reduce the level of military forces in Europe. We have renewed the 1972 agreement for cooperation in science and technology, and a similar agreement for cooperation in outer space. We are seeking ways to cooperate in improving world health and in relieving world hunger. In the strategic arms limitation talks, confirming and then building on Vladivostok accords, we need to make steady progress toward our long-term goals of genuine reductions and strict limitations, while maintaining the basic strategic balance. We have outlined proposals incorporating significant new elements of arms control, deep reductions in the arsenals of both sides, freezing of deployment and technology, and restraining certain elements in the strategic posture of both sides that threaten to destabilize the balance which now exists. The Vladivostok negotiations of 1974 left some issues unresolved and subject to honest differences of interpretation. Meanwhile, new developments in technology have created new concerns--the cruise missile, the very large intercontinental ballistic missiles of the Soviets. The Soviets are worried about our cruise missiles, and we are concerned about the security of our own deterrent capability.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5054, "text": "Our cruise missiles are aimed at compensating for the growing threat to our deterrent, represented by the buildup of strategic Soviet offensive weapons forces. If these threats can be controlled, and I believe they can, then we are prepared to limit our own strategic programs. But if an agreement cannot be reached, there should be no doubt that the United States can and will do what it must to protect our security and to ensure the adequacy of our strategic posture. Our new proposals go beyond those that have been made before. In many areas we are in fact addressing for the first time the tough, complex core of longstanding problems. We are trying for the first time to reach agreements that will not be overturned by the next technological breakthrough. We are trying, in a word, for genuine accommodation. But none of these proposals that I have outlined to you involves a sacrifice of security. All of them are meant to increase the security of both sides. Our view is that a SALT agreement which just reflects the lowest common denominator that can be agreed upon easily will only create an illusion of progress and, eventually, a backlash against the entire arms control process. Our view is that genuine progress in SALT will not merely stabilize competition in weapons but can also provide a basis for improvement in political relations as well. When I say that these efforts are intended to relax tensions, I am not speaking only of military security. I mean as well the concern among our own individual citizens, Soviet and American, that comes from the knowledge which all of you have that the leaders of our two countries have the capacity to destroy human society through misunderstandings or mistakes. If we can relax this tension by reducing the nuclear threat, not only will we make the world a safer place but we will also free ourselves to concentrate on constructive action to give the world a better life. We have made some progress toward our goals, but to be frank, we also hear some negative comments from the Soviet side about SALT and about our more general relations. If these comments are based on a misconception about our motives, then we will redouble our efforts to make our motives clear; but if the Soviets are merely making comments designed as propaganda to put pressure on us What matters ultimately is whether we can create a relationship of cooperation that will be rooted in the national interests of both sides. We shape our own policies to accommodate a constantly changing world, and we hope the Soviets will do the same. Together we can give this change a positive direction.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5055, "text": "Increased trade between the United States and the Soviet Union would help us both. The American-Soviet Joint Commercial Commission has resumed its meetings after a long interlude. I hope that conditions can be created that will make possible steps toward expanded trade. In southern Africa we have pressed for Soviet and Cuban restraint. Throughout the nonaligned world, our goal is not to encourage dissension or to redivide the world into opposing ideological camps, but to expand the realm of independent, economically self-reliant nations, and to oppose attempts at new kinds of subjugation. Part of the Soviet Union leaders' current attitude may be due to their apparent-and incorrect--belief that our concern for human rights is aimed specifically at them or is an attack on their vital interests. We stand on what we have said on the subject of human rights. the positive and sincere expression of our deepest beliefs as a people. It is addressed not to any particular people or area of the world, but to all countries equally, yes, including our own country. And it is specifically not designed to heat up the arms race or bring back the cold war. On the contrary, I believe that an atmosphere of peaceful cooperation is far more conducive to an increased respect for human rights than an atmosphere of belligerence or hatred or warlike confrontation. The experience of our own country this last century has proved this over and over again. We have no illusions that the process will be quick or that change will come easily. But we are confident that if we do not abandon the struggle, the cause of personal freedom and human dignity will be enhanced in all nations of the world. We are going to do that. In the past 6 months we have made clear our determination--both to give voice to Americans' fundamental beliefs and to obtain lasting solutions to East-West differences. If this chance to emphasize peace and cooperation instead of animosity and division is allowed to pass, it will not have been our choice. We must always combine realism with principle. Our actions must be faithful to the essential values to which our own society is dedicated, because our faith in those values is the source of our confidence that this relationship will evolve in a more constructive direction. But there are things which give me hope, and in conclusion I would like to mention them very briefly. This place where I now stand is one of the oldest cities in the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscharlestonsouthcarolinaremarksthe31stannualmeetingthesouthernlegislative", "title": "Charleston, South Carolina Remarks at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Southern Legislative Conference.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/charleston-south-carolina-remarks-the-31st-annual-meeting-the-southern-legislative", "publication_date": "21-07-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5085, "text": "It is an honor to be here to swear in my friend. I first want to say it is a treat to see Mr. and Mrs. Allbaugh, from the great State of Oklahoma; and his brother; most importantly, Diane and Taylor. Of course, you would not have missed it. When I was a Governor, Joe and I used to travel a lot together, and a lot of times people would come up and say, Is he your bodyguard? And that is the kind of man he is, and that is the kind of man I wanted to run FEMA. When the worst happens anywhere in America, I can assure you folks will be confident when Joe Allbaugh arrives on the scene. 54 in the morning, an earthquake rocked the State of Washington, injuring hundreds of people and causing billion dollars of property damage. 30 that night, Joe Allbaugh was on the scene ready to assist people in need. That is the kind of man he is. I could not have made it to Washington without him. And I cannot tell you how honored I am that he has come to Washington to serve his country. more than 2,000 dedicated employees all across America; 4,000 standby employees, ready if needed; an ethic of professionalism; and a willingness to work with State and local officials to help people in need. As Governor, I worked with FEMA officials. Joe and I have great respect for the outgoing Director, James Lee Witt, and for the Acting Director, John Magaw. A lot of change is needed in Washington, but in this Agency the standards are already high. Every year, many thousands of Americans live through floods and hurricanes and fires. They know from personal experience that FEMA is an example of the Federal Government at its best. And I will tell you from personal experience that FEMA has a new Director that speaks to America at its best. When he acts, he will have my full confidence. When he speaks, it will inspire confidence in others. This Agency is in strong and steady hands. Joe will be at the White House many times in the next few years. In the nature of his job, they will not always be the happiest of times. But Joe will help Americans deal with the worst in the best, most compassionate way possible.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingceremonyforjoemallbaughdirectorthefederalemergencymanagement", "title": "Remarks at the Swearing-In Ceremony for Joe M. Allbaugh as Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-ceremony-for-joe-m-allbaugh-director-the-federal-emergency-management", "publication_date": "05-03-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5086, "text": "It is great to be back at the National Women's Law Center, surrounded by so many powerful and accomplished women. This is not a new experience for me. Some of you know my household is filled with powerful, accomplished women. I want to thank Marcia and Duffy for that wonderful, heartfelt introduction and for their extraordinary leadership. Most of all, I want to recognize tonight's honorees, the women and men there is some men in the group who endured insults and beatings and risked their lives 50 years ago because they believed in a different future for their daughters and for their sons. The Freedom Riders had faith that America could still be perfected. And as has been noted, it is only because they did that I am able to stand here as President of the United States of America. Which is why, when I had a chance to see them backstage, I gave them all a kiss and a hug. And I told them that even though I was in diapers at the time, I knew something important was going on. What a remarkable group of people, and how blessed we are to have them here, sharing their stories and continuing to inspire us in so many ways. We are truly grateful to you. Being here tonight reminds us that history is not always made in fact, often is not made by generals or presidents or politicians. Change happens when a group of students and activists decide to ride a bus down South, knowing full well the dangers that lie ahead. Change happens when a group of legal secretaries decides that the world needs more women attorneys, and they start an organization to fight for people like them. I do not want to be paid less than that man who is doing the exact same job over there. I want to be paid the same. Change depends on persistence, and change depends on determination. That is how change happened on August 4, 1961. That is how change will happen today, especially when it comes to securing equal rights and equal opportunities for women. Now, the last time I spoke here was in 2005. I was brand new to Washington. Some of you still could not pronounce my name. And when I was thinking about what to say to this group, I was not just thinking about the legal cases you have helped to win or the milestones that you have helped to reach. I was thinking about my daughters and the world I want them to grow up in. Michelle helpfully reminds me that I have more gray hair now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalwomenslawcenterawardsdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Women's Law Center Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-womens-law-center-awards-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5087, "text": "More people know my name, which I have come to realize is a mixed blessing. Malia and Sasha have grown into these strong, smart, remarkable young women. Malia has a cell phone now, certainly a mixed blessing. But even after all this time, my wish for my daughters and for yours remains the same. I want them to go out into a world where there is no limit to how big they can dream, how high they can reach. And being here with all of you gives me hope and makes me determined, because although this journey is far from over, today our daughters live in a world that is fairer and more equal than it was 6 years ago, a world where more doors are open to them than ever before. Today, for the first time in history, our daughters can see not one, not two, but three women sitting on the bench of the highest court in the land. They can come to the White House and see that the top four lawyers on my staff some of the sharpest legal minds I have ever come across are women. They can read about the extraordinary leadership of a woman in the House of Representatives who went by the title Madam Speaker. They can turn on the news and see that one of the most formidable Presidential candidates we have ever seen has become one of the best Secretaries of State that this country has ever known. Today, women make up almost half of our workforce, the majority of students in our colleges and our graduate schools. Women are breaking barriers in every field, from science to business to sports to the Armed Forces. And today, thanks to health care reform that many of you helped pass, insurance companies can no longer deny coverage based on preexisting conditions like breast cancer or charge women more because they are more likely to incur costs for things like birth childbirth. Those same companies must cover the cost of preventive services like mammograms, domestic violence counseling, contraception. We are making sure that women in the military and our veterans get the care that they need. Today, thanks to the tireless efforts of people like Lilly Ledbetter one of my favorite people, love that woman we were backstage talking, and she was just saying how grateful she was, how much of a responsibility she now felt with this bill having been passed that was named after her. Lilly, all that did was just that was just icing on the cake. It was your work, your courage, your determination that changed things.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalwomenslawcenterawardsdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Women's Law Center Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-womens-law-center-awards-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5088, "text": "All we did was ratify what you had already done. And because of her and other courageous women and some of the women in this room tonight, it is easier for women to demand equal pay for equal work. We passed tax credits that are keeping more women out of poverty and helping them reach the middle class. One of the first things I did after taking office was to create a White House Council on Women and Girls to make sure that every agency in the Federal Government considers the needs of women and girls in every decision they make, not as a sideshow, not as a box to check, but something that is sustained each and every day. And of course, one thing we have learned from the women's movement, from the civil rights movement, from the workers' movement, from every step that we have made to make this country more equal and more just, is that there is always more work to do. And that is especially true today, with so many Americans struggling to recover from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. In the early days of this crisis, women were not hit quite as hard as men. Many of the jobs that we have lost over the last decade have been in construction and manufacturing, industries that traditionally had been dominated by men. And of the 15 job categories projected to grow the most in this country over the next decade, all but 2 are occupied primarily by women. But over the last couple of years, women have continued to lose jobs, especially in the public sector. It does not help that mothers are the primary or cobreadwinners in 63 percent of households, even as women still earn just 77 cents for every dollar a man does. Some of these women are single moms like my mother was, struggling just to keep up with the bills or pay a mortgage they cannot afford. I still remember my mother waking me up she worked, was going to school, and still took the time to wake me up before she went to work to go over my lessons before she left. And I would complain and grumble, and she would say, Well, this is no picnic for me either, buster. Their names do not make the history books. They are never complaining well, I will not say they are never complaining I was thinking about that for a second never hesitating to work that extra shift or that extra job if that is what it takes to give their children a better life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalwomenslawcenterawardsdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Women's Law Center Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-womens-law-center-awards-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5089, "text": "And in many ways, that is why we are all here tonight, because we know that it is up to us to keep fighting for them all those women out there making sure that they are treated fairly and equally. As hard as they are working, as much as they are sacrificing, as many responsibilities that they shoulder each and every day, we have got to make sure that they are getting the opportunities that they deserve, that somebody is standing up for them. Somebody is fighting for them. Somebody is looking out for them. Somebody is rooting for them. When we talk about these issues that primarily affect women, these are not just women's issues. When women make less than men for the same work, that hurts the entire family who has to get by with less. It hurts businesses who have fewer customers with money to spend. When a health care plan denies women coverage because of a preexisting condition, that puts a strain on emergency rooms, drives up health care costs for everybody. When any of our citizens cannot fulfill their potential because of factors that have nothing to do with their talent or their character or their work ethic, that diminishes us. It says something about who we are. If you want to look around the world, those countries that are developing fastest, that are doing the best, where their children are succeeding in school, those are societies that respect the rights of women, that are investing in our women. Now unfortunately, not everybody in Washington seems to feel the same way. In recent weeks, Republicans in the Senate have come together three times to block jobs bills that independent economists say would boost our economy and put millions back to work, including women. Each of these bills was made up of the same kinds of proposals that Democrats and Republicans have historically supported in the past, and they were fully paid for. And even though they were supported by a clear majority of the American people Republicans, Democrats, Independents every single Senate Republican said no. Said no to putting hundreds of thousands of teachers, three-quarters of them women, back in front of the classroom where they belong. No to putting construction workers back on the job and funding a special program that gets more women involved in the construction industry. We are not done yet. In the weeks ahead, they are going to get a chance to vote on whether we give a tax cut to virtually every small-business owner in America, including 900,000 women.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalwomenslawcenterawardsdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Women's Law Center Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-womens-law-center-awards-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5090, "text": "These are folks who run the restaurants and stores and beauty shops and other small businesses that create two-thirds of all new jobs. There is no reason they should not get a break. The American people are with me with on this, and Republicans in Congress should be with me too, because it is right for the country. Instead, they are spending time focusing on how to turn back the clock. Instead of figuring out how to put more Americans back to work, they have been trying to figure out how to take away preventive care that is covered under the Affordable Care Act. Instead of making life easier for women in this country, they want to let insurance companies go back to charging higher prices just because you are a woman. Pap smears and breast exams. That is not the right direction for this country. These folks know they cannot win on the big issues, so they are trying to make the fight about social issues that stir up their base. They are spending their time trying to divide this country against itself rather than coming together to lift up our country. And we do not have to settle for that. The American people should not have to settle for that. And that is why I need your help. As leaders in your communities, I need you to tell Congress to do their jobs by worrying about the jobs of the millions of Americans they were elected to serve. And for my part, I promise to keep doing everything I can to help every single American achieve their own piece of the American Dream. That is not just a promise I am making as a President. That is a promise I am making as a grandson who saw my grandmother hit the glass ceiling at the bank where she worked, passed over for promotions in favor of men that she trained. It is a promise I am making as a husband who watched Michelle balance work and family with grace and poise, even when it has not been easy. It is a promise I am making as a father who wants my daughters to grow up in a world where every door is open to them, where there are no limits on what they can achieve. It is a promise I am making as the inheritor of the extraordinary sacrifices that were made by these Freedom Riders, as a friend of people like Lilly Ledbetter, who embody all that is good and decent in this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalwomenslawcenterawardsdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Women's Law Center Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-womens-law-center-awards-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5091, "text": "It is a promise I am making as an American who believes that the future of our country depends on expanding the circle of opportunity for everybody, because that next generation of smart, powerful women, they are already knocking on the door. Last month, I got a chance to meet the winners of the Google Science Fair. This is an international competition of high school students, the cutting edge of technology and science. All three of the winners turned out to be Americans. They had beat out 10,000 other applicants from more than 90 countries. So I had them in the Oval Office, and they explained their projects to me and I pretended that I understood what they were talking about. There is a picture of this conversation hanging up in the West Wing right now, and they are I have got a puzzled look on my face and they are being very patient. So one of the winners, Shree Bose, discovered a promising new way to improve treatment for ovarian cancer at the age of 17. Then I asked another winner, Lauren Hodge, if she had skipped a grade in school; she was quite petite. And she informed me very politely that she had actually skipped two. It is people like Shree and Lauren, all of you who are here tonight, who make me hopeful about the future. There is a direct line between those women who sat in those jail cells and those young girls explaining their science project in the Oval Office. Because that is what America is about, a place where ideas are born and dreams can grow and where a student in a classroom or a passenger on a bus or a legal secretary in an office can stand up and say, I am going to change the world. That is the kind of nation that we are. That is the kind of opportunity that must exist here in America. That is the kind of opportunity that must exist for every American, no matter what they look like or where they come from. We have come a long way towards making this country more open and more free for our daughters and theirs. We have got a lot more work to do. With the National Women's Law Center, I am confident that the next time I visit, we will be even closer to guaranteeing every one of our children get the future they deserve. God bless you. God bless the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalwomenslawcenterawardsdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Women's Law Center Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-womens-law-center-awards-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5093, "text": "And thank you to Charlie for that introduction, which was so beautiful and for your fearless leadership of Turning Point Action and Turning Point USA. Let me also express my incredible appreciation to the thousands of bold, young, and proud American patriots that are with us today. And you think this is a lot of people, you ought to look outside. We love you. You are the pulse of our movement, so true, and you are the ones who will make America great again. I started saying make America great again, again, think of that. Think about that because nobody's done what we did in four years, the greatest economy, we will be talking about it. We have plenty of time. Does everybody have some time? I said, I look forward to this speech. So I said, Oh, can we maybe do it by Zoom? But Zoom will never replace the real thing. Especially for our great young students, it cannot replace being in the classroom, can it? With your help, we will stand up for democracy and for justice. We will fight for truth, transparency and accountability, and we will not stop until we have restored our American birthright of honest, free, and fair elections. We are gathered here in Phoenix to show our support for election integrity and for the brave and unyielding conservative warriors in the Arizona state Senate. You created a movement all over the country. This is now starting all over the country. I am hearing Texas wants to do a forensic audit, I just heard. Even though I won Texas by a lot, I said, You should do it because you will find out what is going on in this country. When you hear defund the police, when you hear no IDs Of course, now they are trying to get into the, We never really said that. But when you hear open borders, how about open borders? In my opinion, there is no way they win elections without cheating. They are against energy. I saw where they are negotiating now with OPEC again. They are negotiating right now with OPEC and with Russia. We had so much oil. We did not know what the hell to do with it. They closed up so many sites. Today I want to send our profound and everlasting gratitude to every Arizona Republican who had the fortitude and the backbone to defy the lying media. That is a lot of media. He is at it again. He is talking about the media. Some of them are down almost 80%.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5094, "text": "Can you believe it? And that is because they lose credibility, but I want to just finish it. We want to demand a full forensic audit of the results of Maricopa county. I particularly want to thank Arizona Senate president, Karen Fan. And I predict when the votes come in and that is her in the Senate, I think they are going to be so horrible that she is going to go three steps further than she ever thought she'd have to because they will be in my opinion, and again, I am not involved. You have already seen some of them come that they are going to go many steps further than they would have. When you looked at election night, we were up by so much. It was over at 10 o'clock and then all of a sudden they close the tabulation areas. They closed everything and we wake up and all of a sudden it is tied or we are losing. And nobody believes that. They do not believe it. I tell you right now, they do not believe it. Tremendous courage, you have. I appreciate it. The whole country appreciates it really a lot. These are people that did this by themselves. They wanted to do it. They had to do it. They saw what was going on and they did it. So I am meeting some of you for the first time. I appreciate it. I do not know him. I recognize that man from television, but I do not know Sonny. Somebody else who is really been out there that is been a brave who wants to go many steps further than anybody, Wendy Rogers. You knew the answer early on when they were waiting for results, but you knew the answer. I did not see you in the audience now. I want it. And by the way, Kelly has to get a special Really great. I would not want to fight you. I like that. We just have a new one, Wendy, Kelly, and Borelli that is going to be a very famous That is going to be a very famous someday, I suspect. Republican party chairwoman, somebody that has tremendous courage I will tell you. And some people love her. And some people do not like her as much. I happen to love her, but she is. And she fights your governor who does not do a damn thing. He does not do a damn thing. I called up Kelly recently. I said, Why would not the governor want an audit? I said, Why would not this governor Doug Ducey", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5095, "text": "When I did rallies, he always wanted to be in the front row. Sir, could you mention my name please? And I did these rallies and he was not very popular, but he won by a lot because he ran against a very defective candidate, which they found out after they nominated that Democrat. But I'd introduce him and I would not get much of an applause and I'd get a lot of boos. He is not popular with me either. They came to see me. They said, Sir, would you like him to run for the Senate? I said, He is not getting my endorsement. I can tell you. He was losing his election in the I will tell you, Kentucky is a great place. I love Kentucky. They love me and I love them and I was way up and he was losing by two points. And he said, Sir, I'd like to see you. Would you give me a big endorsement? And could you do a television commercial? And I did not love the idea because I am not too high on him, but it was between him or a woman named Amy McGrath, a Democrat. She had 93 million sitting in the bank and he was two down and he was going to get blown away and I endorsed him and he went up 20 points, 20. She did not even spend her money. She had no chance because of my endorsement he went up 20 points and then he got up and said the nastiest things about me. Sonny, it is not that way in Arizona is it? You endorse somebody, you help somebody. I do not want any praise. I do not want anything, but I do not want to have that kind of a thing happen. So it is one of those things. But what you are doing here is incredible as everyone here fully understands. And I tell this to people. I tell it to Republicans and a lot of them are very good people and they say, Well, sir, we have to get onto the future. Let me tell you, you are not going to have a future. First of all, our nation is being destroyed, but you are not going to have a future in '22 or '24 if you do not find out how they cheated with hundreds of thousands and even millions of votes, because you will not win anything. You will not win anything.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5096, "text": "And I tell Republicans, I say, You do not realize, because some of them they are good meaning, really a lot of them, most of them. We have certain people that are not good. They do not have the Mitt Romney's the little Ben Sasse's of the world. They do not have I could name a few of them. Could I have your endorsement? The day after he won, he goes and starts going after ENTITY. But you know, I tell people, this is the biggest issue there is. This is bigger than the border. This is bigger than anything. And I see it just here and I'd say I'd make a speech. And I talk about the border because we straightened out the border. We had the strongest border in history. We straightened out the border and that is a big deal. But when you look at all of the death and destruction that this election has caused and wait til you see what is happening with inflation. Wait til you see the real numbers on inflation and what is going on. And wait til you go to the pump today and you see $3.75 cents. We were at a $1.87 for a gallon of gasoline. It was the most corrupt, dishonest, and unfair election in the history of our country. The Democrats know it. The corrupt media, right back there a lot of people, they know it. Big tech knows it. And most importantly, we, the American people know it. We know it. But because of the steadfast conservatives all across our nation and that is really happening now. They have come from so many different states to look at your audit procedures that they go back and I will call them and say, How did you like it? What did you think? They said, We do not believe it. And then they are starting their own audits now. They are looking at what Karen and Kelly They are looking what they all set up here and they cannot Wendy, what you have done. Borelli, I love you. That is why I like him. He is tough as nails too, but you know what? They are looking and they go back to their state and they say, This is the most incredible thing that we have seen anytime. Why would not somebody want election integrity? It will not happen, but I would be very happy if they did it and everything was perfect. But you are not going to find that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5097, "text": "In fact, the preliminary numbers are a total disaster and we are going to go over those numbers. The truth is being uncovered and the crime of the century is being fully exposed. With what inflation is doing to our country. Now you have in Chicago, hundreds of people are being shot every weekend in Afghanistan. We have not lost one soldier in Afghanistan for the last year and a half. In Chicago, they have 188 people shot over a weekend. Many of whom die. That is worse than any war zone anywhere in the world. Chicago and New York, what is happening in New York. And Rudy Giuliani was the greatest mayor in the history of New York City, by the way. And they are going after him because he understands it and they are going after him What they are doing to Rudy is a disgrace. And you know, if I would have said that five years ago, 10 years ago, it would not have meant as much. Now you realize what having a great mayor is all about because when you look at what the hell is happening to our cities, run by Democrats, all run by Democrats. There is never been any It is a crime wave the likes of which we have never seen before. People are afraid to walk down to the streets of New York and nobody gets prosecuted except Republicans, by the way. In every fake news story about the election, they always begin by stating that claims are unproven. Do you ever notice, you read a story and you are reading about massive fraud, but they do not write about that too much. And you are saying, Well, wait a minute, we caught thousands and hundreds of thousands of people. And then they go, While there is no evidence, they have these little soundbites. But the craziest of them all is and always done in unison because you know, they work together. If this were a business they would be put in jail because it would be called a monopoly. But the biggest and the craziest of the big lie, they call it. And I have got to tell you, I have got to say this. I have never said it before, but I have always thought it. If I lost the election, I am okay with that. I am okay with it. If we lost the election, we lose an election. I will start building buildings. I will do something. I will keep myself busy. If we lost the election, we know when we lose. In Georgia, they had an election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5098, "text": "And everyone knew we won by hundreds of thousands and they stole it from us. And what happened is we had two senators running a couple of months later and you know what happened to them? This election was rigged, and they know it. If I lost this election, I could handle it pretty easily. When they steal it from you and rig it, that is not easy. We have no choice. And it starts right here with the amazing patriots in Arizona. You are proving them wrong because the evidence is monumental, just like Russia, Russia, Russia. Remember people would come up to me during the campaign, the first campaign and they said, Sir, you know what I think about Russia? Another one would come up a month later, Sir, do you have anything to do with Russia? No, I never even thought of it. But after I got asked that question four or five times, I said, What the hell is going on with the Russia? And it was a fake deal made up by Hillary Clinton with a fake dossier where they pay. They play a different game. But you know, ultimately we are much bigger than them. We have many more people because when you go over their policies, the fact is those policies are not a 50% of the vote. We have many, many more people. If they ever had our policies, maybe there'd be no Republican party, I must be honest with you, because we have not until now. And it started with these incredible people, many of whom are sitting right here. The state senators from Arizona, it started with them. And now it is turning out to be a revolution in this country because people are saying, even some Democrats, they are saying no. Knowing what happened in the election is a good thing, not a bad thing. And what are they trying to hide? Why would not they want it? That is why I do not understand guys like Ducey and your commissioners. But you know, you have the witch hunt. And it shows you how the Republicans can really stick together. We have great Republicans. You have Jim Jordan. I am going to get in trouble, but you have Jim Jordan and Devin. And by the way, you have three of them here tonight. These guys I am going to I hope you love them all because those three are fighters. But we will introduce them in a second. That way they will not take up any of our time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5099, "text": "Here is just some of the shocking information the auditors in Arizona have already reported. This is not coming from ENTITY. Now I lost by about 10,000. We won by a lot. So we need more than 10. And we have numerous categories, almost all of which are much more than we would need to win the election. If I lost by 10 and we found out that there were only two dead people, okay. There were thousands and thousands of dead people that voted in different states, thousands and thousands. Some even applied for an application to vote. Do you believe that? So not only did they vote, they applied for an application, but if had two dead people and we lost by 10,000, I do not consider that. 74,000 mail-in ballots were counted with no clear record of them being ever sent. Other than that, it was very good. The county has refused to disclose how many of these 74,000 were in person, early votes. And how many were magically appearing in a mail-in ballot box near you? How about those boxes where they were coming in and Biden was getting 97% of the vote? In all fairness, we'd come. We came for rallies here. We had 42,000 and 44,000 and he came and he could not fill the eight circles. They had to use the fake news. No, they were calling the news. They are standing with cameras. They could not fill the eight circles. The only thing I liked about his campaign, because he did not really campaign, the cabal campaign. Lots of people campaigned for him. But I did like the, the contractor, and it was not Hunter Biden with his artistry. I am very good at building buildings and painting and all these different things. So painting, I know what a good paint job is, and you are not getting it from Hunter. In fact, I probably will not do it yet, but at some point I am going to find out the name of the contractor that did those circles, because I want to use them for some. But what about Hunter Biden getting a half a million dollars per painting, and he never painted before? Could you imagine if my kids did that? And now they are justifying it. You have good painters. For $250, you can have a portrait done on Central Park. You go to Central Park, and they have all these artists lined up.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5100, "text": "You negotiate a deal, they will do it for $250. Some of them are beyond belief, what they can do in a short period of time. Hunter Biden's getting $500, 000. It is disgraceful, and the fake news media is talking about it like it is okay, but we should have transparency. And the laptop and the laptop, I miss you too. And the laptop from hell, it is a laptop from hell. When you look at that laptop, people are writing about it. Meaning a very tiny group of people are writing. When you look at the laptop from hell, and then you watch the interview. It was Russia that did his laptop. I think that is the end of that one. Because they are all getting rich from China. They are not getting rich from Russia. It is always Russia, Russia, Russia did it. Russia did it again. By the way, I stopped their pipeline. They have a pipeline going into Germany, going into Europe. I stopped it. I put sanctions on all these states and all of these companies who were building it. Biden approved it. Then as you know, you have heard this before he stopped the Keystone XL pipeline. They said 8,000, 48,000 jobs. And they lost all over the country. People sold their home. They were so excited that we are going to be building this pipeline. They were building it, and he stopped it like in the first week he stopped it. Yet he approves the biggest pipeline in the world, going from Russia to Germany. And we are supposed to protect Germany. I said that. I said, By the way, you would have never even heard about that pipeline if it was not for me. Nobody ever heard of that. Nobody ever talked about it until I came along. Look, I get along with Putin because that is a good thing. I got along with him. He got along with me, but nobody was ever tougher on Russia that I was. I asked Angela, and I get along with Angela too, but she is doing what she is doing for Germany. Although I think the pipeline's a big mistake for Germany because they might as well just wave the red flag or the white flag because it is over. They are going to get 60, 70% of their energy from Russia. So I said, So let me ask you, so we are spending billions of dollars to protect you from Russia.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5101, "text": "And you are paying billions and billions of dollars for energy to Russia. What the hell is that all about? So I stopped it and within a couple of weeks he approved it, and now they are going to be restarting it. They will have it finished in a couple of months and they are going to make billions and billions of dollars, but the American pipeline is stopped. And I can only say that is called America first versus America last. Look, they are destroying our country. If the election were the way it were, and let us say they were doing a great job, number one, you probably would not be as enthusiastic. Let us say they were doing a great job. By the way, your Arizona border, which I put up the wall. And now what is pouring into your state is not even to be believed. They are saying it was the worst six months in the history of the presidency. If you look at what is happened to the economy. I came up with the vaccine. They said it would take three to five years, going to save the world. I recommend you take it. But I also believe in your freedoms a hundred percent. We are doing a million people a day, and then they said, We are going to put a pause on one of the vaccines. What that did, that set it back so badly. And so now they are saying what a wonderful job he did. They do not say it too much anymore with respect to giving the vaccine. Now it is turning out that they cannot say that anymore. And what they have done is because they do not trust the president, people are not doing it. We did such an incredible job with ENTITY, with getting the gowns, the supplies, the ventilators, the masks, everything, and the press did nothing but kill us. They would say, Look how well India's doing compared to the United States. India is going through hell. They would always try and pick the best country anywhere in the world that had the least problem. Those countries now are being ravaged by this plague that was sent to us by China. And by the way, China has to pay us retribution. There were nearly 4,000 people who voted with a registration date after the cutoff on October 15th. So you have a cutoff, a legal cutoff, but thousands of people voted, and that is illegal. Additionally, there were more than 11,000 individuals who were not on the voter rolls the day after the election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5102, "text": "They were not on the voter rolls the day after the election. ut who were on the list of voters that was published one month after the election. So they were not there for the election, but a month later they happened to find them, okay? This alone is more than the supposed margin that you needed. We beat it in every category. There were 18,000 people who voted in Arizona in 2020, who were then purged from the rolls immediately after the election. Why did not they purge them before, Sonny? Could I ask you that question? We are becoming like a third world nation, and it is happening. Then 168,000 ballots were found to be printed on unofficial, very thin, flimsy paper. In other words, sounds to me like they were short of ballots, and they just made them up because you have what is called quote Voter secure paper. It is like the dollar bill. But they did not have that. So they had 168,000 votes and that is required. You have to have it. And they found it on paper. And the reason they noticed it, I guess, number one, it was very light, but they saw that when you hit it with a certain pen, it went right through the paper. They say, What the kind of papers is this? that is 168,000 votes. They would not have allowed it to be on election day. They would not have allowed it. I wonder who they voted for. Tell me, I wonder who they voted for. Would you say it was a hundred percent for Biden or 97%? It was also revealed in a recent hearing that there are thousands and thousands of duplicated ballots that do not have a serial number, suggesting that votes may have been fraudulently duplicated and counted multiple times. You saw it in Georgia, you saw those people go in. Everybody got the hell out. They do not want a water main break. And a short while later, a woman, a political operative, we all know her name. We all know her name, and it should have been taken care of, which should have been taken care of. But a woman comes in, but it is now it is in court, and it is a big deal. She came in with a group. She did not go back to her machine. They went for the table.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5103, "text": "They lifted up the skirt of the table, and lo and behold, it was loaded up with ballots, but they were not ballots that were in boxes that ballots come. They were in other, whether it was suitcases. They took those, and they started putting them in. And I tell you what, when people looked at that they got sick. People threw up looking at it, and law enforcement did very little, but now what is happening is I believe the courts are going to do a lot. So you hear those hundreds of thousands of votes. We won the state of Arizona, and we won it decisively. And we won other of these states. He beat Biden all over the country decisively. So did Hillary, except in five swing states where Biden wiped him out with the black population. So I think that he is not going to beat Obama, but only of these states. So he did poorly, except in these states, he had massive victories. Yet this is only the beginning of the irregularities the Arizona audit is an uncovering. The authors and the auditors have collected a sworn affidavit stating that county election workers lowered signature matching standards from 20 points of comparison to 10, to five, and eventually down to zero. In other words, they abolished all signature matching entirely. In other words, you have a bad signature. So the machine was picking up a lot of bad signatures. Let us lower it. Let us lower it. They brought it down to zero. So you had no signature matching. This is why the county has refused to comply with an official subpoena sent out by your great senate to provide images of the envelopes, which would prove whether they counted ballots and whether or not they had signatures at all. Because we think many of them had no signature at all because you cannot sign them all during the night. We think they did not , and you know what else they did not have? They did not have folds. In order to have a ballot counted, it has to be folded. But so many of these pages are laying flat without a crease, without a fold. Cyber security experts have also testified that the logs for the election management system software were wiped under highly suspicious circumstances. This is them saying it, not me. With more than 37,000 requests made to the server in a single day. Gee, I wonder why they erased the data surrounding the election? The county has, for whatever reason, also refused to produce the network routers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5104, "text": "We want the routers, Sonny, Wendy, we got to get those routers, please. Come on, Kelly, we can get those routers. We are so beyond the routers, there is so many fraudulent votes without the routers. But if you got those routers, what that will show, and they do not want to give up the routers. They do not want to give them. They are fighting like hell. Why are these commissioners fighting not to give the routers? That will tell the truth. What are they trying to hide? Unbelievably, the auditors have testified that the master database for the election management system, sorry to tell you, has been deleted. Meaning the main database for all of the election related data in Maricopa in 2020 has been illegally erased. The county has also refused to provide the authority for the information. We want the information needed to access vote tabulation devices. To top it all off, they have refused to hand over the all-important chain of custody documentation for Maricopa County ballots. They do not want to give it. Why do not they want to give it? I stand before you today to demand nothing less than full and complete cooperation from Maricopa County and from the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors who have fought your senate at every single turn. Why are Republicans fighting it? All they have to do is hand it over, and they are either going to be right. They just do not want it. I think they know a hell of a lot about what happened, but why do not they want to do that? The citizens of Arizona, an incredible state that as you know, I won four years ago and I won it again. Somebody came in from a media group, a very good media group, actually, said, What was the difference between 2016 and 2020? I said, Well, the difference was I actually did much better in 2020. We got 75 million votes. We got 12 million votes more. No president in history has ever gotten anywhere close to 12 million more votes. And that is with them doing counting. Because the easiest way of cheating is to throw them away. The postmen do not have to deliver them. The post office does not have to deliver them. They have the greatest pension plan that anybody's ever seen. But you know, a lot of them did not go to their location and when they were signed, they did not get brought back.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5105, "text": "But when you think about it, and when you think about the corruptness, why do not these people want to find out the truth? The citizens of America deserve answers. We are talking about America. You know, we are not talking about Arizona anymore. We are talking about the United States of America because this has gone on. And I hate to say it, but this is because you are really bad, but this has gone much worse in Detroit, Michigan, much worse. We have a bunch of RINO senators up there. You have one or two. We have a whole bunch of them up there, but we have a bunch of RINO senators. This is not as bad anywhere near, in my opinion, as Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. You take a look at Philadelphia. What they did to our poll watchers were incredible. We had poll watchers, nice people, great people. They love our country. They were Republican, but more than anything else, they want an honest count. They'd turn them in either way. They were physically thrown the hell out and they could not get in for days. So during that period of time, vast numbers of things happen that are terrible. And not only did they throw them out, they boarded up the windows. Then we got a court order, and they would not obey the court order. And then they kept them 60 feet away. That is like me looking at a vote with the lady in the beautiful red dress right over there, right? They were threatened by thugs. In Georgia a a recent review of valid images has shown that the error rate in the hand audit of Atlanta's Fulton County was a whopping 60%. All of this is in addition to the recently discovered 35,000 illegal votes that were potentially cast by people who did not live in the county in which they voted. As well as 100,000 people who were purged from the Georgia rolls after the election. I lost by like 11,000. They have a 100,00 plus, they were purged. That is the only one, but we have many. In other words, it is determinative. It is no wonder that Joe Biden and the radical Democrats are going absolutely crazy screaming about voting rights, ranting about democracy. They want democracy and resisting every effort to look into the massive fraud in 2020. Just so you understand, we talk about cancel culture.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5106, "text": "The biggest thing that they want canceled is they do not want you talking about the election that just took place because they say, Holy shit, they caught us. They caught us. They caught us. We have seen it. It is a scandal, the likes of which we have never had, but the only way you get away with a scandal is if they do not talk about it. They do not want to talk about it. They are not going to be able not to talk about it. They do not want to talk about it. Everything about cancel culture, they want cancel culture. But what they do not want to do is anything having to do with the 2020 election. They almost got away with it. They may have gotten away with it. If somebody robs Tiffany, a beautiful jeweler, 57th and Fifth, good location, excellent location. And they steal the diamonds and then they get caught. They have to turn the diamonds back. I only wish that my friend Mike Pence had that additional courage to send the results back to the legislatures because it all happened so quickly. They schemed in this plan for four years, this all happened so quickly. If he would have sent it back to the legislature, somebody gave him bad advice. Georgia, they could not count their votes accurately. Hear ye, hear ye, the great state of Georgia can not accurately count its votes. You know what Thomas Jefferson said? Long time ago, he said, Then we will keep the votes from the great state of Georgia. He did not say, we are going to send it back. I am saying, just send it back. But when you have more votes in some places by a lot than you have voters, I think Mike would have had the right to say, Excuse me, we have more votes than we have voters. If you do not mind, please take a look at it. So I wish he did that. I wish he did that. The radical left Democrat communist party rigged and sold the election. And we caught them. The time to hold them responsible and fix this broken and corrupt system is not in 2022 where it may be just as corrupt. Or in 2024, the time is right now here in Arizona. If you do not get down to it and if you do not find, I hate to say this because it is terrible for our country. But you are going to have Republicans that are not going to want to vote. They are not going to want to work for Kelly.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5107, "text": "They are not going to want to have to work for Wendy and for Borelli, Mister Italy, they are not going to work for you. You know what they are going to say? And that is what happened to the two senators. They are not going to work for you. We do not have the luxury to sit back and to wait until the next election. So many people, and they are such good, I said it before. You are leading in the polls. We just got back from CPAC. I was at 98% approval rating in the poll. You think we are at 98? I do not know, 98, 98. And they say, Sir, you are leading in the polls, sir. You are way ahead of everybody. Run in '24, sir, you are going to win. The survival of our nation depends on holding these responsible. And we have to hold these responsible elections. We have to hold those that are responsible for the 2020 presidential elections scam. It was a scam, greatest crime in history, and we have to hold these people accountable. And hopefully, and I say this, and I have confidence in it. Hopefully your Attorney General Mark Brnovich, your state attorney general will take information. He is going to take it, and he is going to do what everybody knows has to be done. If he does not do that, it would be so sad. And your governor, Doug Ducey, he will be of no help to you. He does not want to know the answer. Numbers like you would not believe. Look, did you ever hear of him? William McSwain, who previously prosecuted much ballot stuffing, many cases in Philadelphia, published a stunning letter. And he did it, I think from the heart, stating that his office received allegations of large scale voter fraud. This is Philadelphia and election irregularities all over Philadelphia. Also one of the most corrupt places from a voter standpoint, another, along with Detroit and some others, one of the most corrupt places, but he found, and he wanted to investigate all of this. But the Attorney General Bill Barr ordered him to stand down, and McSwain was not the only one. And McSwain is very angry about it. Then Bill Barr went out and said there was not fraud in the election of any consequence. I am giving you today. And we need two large ones or three small ones. We have many, many to look at.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5108, "text": "In other words, we are right there. So it is of consequence. It is only because sadly, he just did not look for fraud. When that letter came out from McSwain, that was a sad day for this country, sad day. he was told not to do it. One day, I noticed that the fake news media was calling Bill Barr, a puppet of ENTITY. They had a picture of him with strings where I was totally controlling him. They were saying that Bill Barr, you have to go against him, Bill Barr. Then they started saying they were going to impeach him. And they are what is called playing the ref. They are doing it with the Supreme Court too. You see now again, they want to impeach Kavanaugh? Not that they want to impeach him. They want to scare the hell out of him so he votes along the liberal lines because if he votes along the liberal lines, they are playing the ref better than the great Bobby Knight of Indiana ever played the ref. Or this, they said, Bobby, Bobby, you are not going to win that call. He said, But I am going to win the next one. That is what they are doing. The great Bobby Knight, who was one of our great endorsements. I will tell you, when Bobby Knight endorsed ENTITY, Indiana, we were doing well there before, you had to see after. Bobby Knight, that is a piece of work, but he said, It may not work this time, but it is going to work the next time. And the refs were afraid to say anything. That is what they are doing with our Supreme Court. They are trying to scare Kavanaugh. They are talking about an impeachment. I just saw it again this morning in the paper. They want to impeach Kavanaugh again. They want him to rule for them. And if he rules for them, they are never going to impeach him. But if he rules against them, like he supposed to, because he is a conservative, but they also do not want to have a packed court. So they are saying we are going to pack the courts. We are going to pack the courts. And they did the same thing to Barr. They said, ENTITY controls him. As soon as I saw that, I said, Here we go, because how does he get out of that? Very simply, just do things like the vote was not rigged.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5109, "text": "And he stopped them from doing it. And I am so saddened by it. But I also understand it because nobody does it better than these crooked Democrats. Nobody does it better. So I do not blame Barr. I do not blame a lot of people, but they become weak and they become ineffective and they become frightened. Like it or not, we are becoming a communist country. We are beyond socialism. When you have no press that you can talk to, that is how a communist country begins. They have no press. We find things in Arizona, and other than a couple of great networks, we have no press. We have no voice. I only have voice because I get great ratings. And if the Democrats get some of the things they currently want passed, including the election of Corrupt Politicians Act, an infrastructure, which is not infrastructure, it will get even worse. What they are asking for is incredible. I always did great with these buildings that the bigger the window, the better I did, the bigger those windows, I wanted floor to ceiling windows, but they say you cannot do that anymore. We do not want any more windows. It is going to be real hard to sell apartments, I think. We have a beautiful apartment, and for environmental reasons, we have not put windows in the building. Whatever happened to cows, remember they were going to get rid of all the cows? They stopped that, people did not like that. You know why they were going to get rid of all the cows? Sadly, even in many red states, the rhinos are letting the radical left have their way on everything. In fact, I have to say this, in many cases, these weak Republicans or rhinos, these weak Republicans are worse. They are worse than Democrats. And you have a couple of examples right here in Arizona and do not nod. And do not say it because I do not want to get you in trouble. Maybe you can convince them to do what is right. But you have a couple of them right here in Arizona and nobody knows. And I will tell you what, they are going to be defeated as sure as you are sitting there, they are going to be defeated in the primaries by real Republicans. You have secretaries of state certified election results that were highly inaccurate. And even fraudulent they are certifying elections where the numbers are fraudulent. You have poll watches, as I said, who were illegally blocked from vote counting in Philadelphia, Detroit, and many, many other cities.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5110, "text": "You say all these different things. A lot of people talking about the machines, I say, you know what? Too complex, you do not need them. They cheated in so many different ways. You do not have to be a great scientist from MIT. They cheated in so many different ways. People were caught on camera illegally running ballots multiple times through voting counting machines. And remember, I am not the one trying to undermine American democracy. I am the one trying to save American democracy. I am trying to save it. Our country is being destroyed by people who have no right to destroy it. People that won an election illegally. They lost in a landslide. Joe Biden and the radical Democrats are wrecking our nation. We went from the strongest border ever to the weakest border ever. Illegal aliens are pouring in, in record numbers. Critical race theory is being forced into every facet of our society. Men are being allowed to compete in women's sports. How do you like that? Did you see the weightlifter? I hate to tell you this women, but he shattered your longstanding record. This guy gets up boom, boom, like a nine year record, sonny, a nine year record. Did he do it with one hand? If I were a coach, I will tell ya. I would not be talking to too many women as we know women. I'd be getting some of these people that they are women. Somebody said that if LeBron James ever decided to get the operation, how would he be? How would he be on the court? And by the way, LeBron James, you can have him. Did you see the basketball ratings, which were terrible. It is in sports and people do not want to see it. They want to see athletes. They want to see competition. But the last thing they want to see is men competing in women's sports. I hate to say it. I hate to say, you are going to have a coach have a full team. And that team is going to win the national championship so easily, you are not going to have women competing. They are taking away your rights. And now they just allowed it to happen in the Olympics. Our infrastructure is being hacked by foreign countries left and right. Thousands of rockets are being fired at Israel. And Joe Biden is allowing America to be pushed around and laughed at all over the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5111, "text": "In addition to all of our work, to hold Democrats accountable for their election fraud, which is massive, we must fight harder than ever before to win a colossal victory for America first Republicans, next year we have to, but again, you have to solve this problem. We are going to work our asses off. But you have to solve this problem. We must reclaim the House. We must reclaim the Senate. Last year, Republicans made massive gains. I got no credit from these people. I made 58 phone calls, 58. Everybody I made it to did so great. In the House, we were expected to lose 25 to 35 seats. And instead of losing 25 to 35 seats, we lost for the first time in many decades, zero seats. And in fact, we shockingly gained 16 seats. And in the Senate, without my involvement, it would right now be 60/40 with the Democrats in the lead. Nobody likes to talk about that. We had such an incredible evening in the election. We did so well in the election. They like to say, I will tell you, you had a gentleman here, a legislator here who said Thank you. And I love you too. He said, Sir, I was prepared to lose my election, people that you know. I did not know him. I spoke to him for the first time. He said, I was prepared to lose my election. Then I went to one of your rallies. And I saw the level of enthusiasm with thousands of people unable to get in. I saw the enthusiasm, but I was very much prepared. He has been there for a long time. Then he said, And then the night before the election, I walked outside with my wife. They had ENTITY Pence and ENTITY, but they had all of these signs and they had the American flag and everybody was going wild. I said 'Darling, I think I am going to win the election.' And the next day, sir, I won the election and I won my district by a lot. And you lost my district. And there was no way that I got more votes than you. You got far more votes than I did, sir. And I said to my wife, 'This election is rigged.' And what the fake news goes around saying is the reason we did so well in legislatures, the reason we did so well in Congress with not any loss, but all of these gains, I guess it was 16.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5112, "text": "All of these gains and the Senate, we did very well. Even though Mitch McConnell should not have said, We will not give 25 cents more than $600. And the other side said, We will give you 2000. Like it or not, that is not good politics. And frankly, they were going to get it anyway. He did ads where he was in the ad and he is not a popular guy. So we should have won those seats. But if you just forget those two seats, we would have been 60/40. And what they try and do is say, Well, the reason we won all Did not we win every legislature in the country? The reason we won is because the legislators were far more popular than ENTITY. No, it is not that, that is why I tell you that rather long story, because we carried them in, but they did not give me and the presidency, they did not give us the votes. Right here in Arizona, we must fire one of the most extreme leftists in Congress, your radical Democrat Senator Mark Kelly. It is that he does not care about the border. With all the time I spent winning the legal stuff, I think we had 11 lawsuits, we won them all, and then I could start. It would have been so much easier, but I never heard from him. He could not care less about your border and your border in Arizona is one big We did such a great job, but he did absolutely nothing. Kelly has done nothing to protect your state. And if you look at the Biden border crisis and it is beyond a crisis, they are saying, Oh, do not use the word crisis. He is completely owned and controlled by Pelosi and Schumer. Now, the socialist Democrats and communists are trying to include amnesty in their reconciliation bill, which would turbocharge the crisis and neither Mark Kelly, nor anybody on the democratic side They are all fake moderates. They say they do not say a word about it. You are getting it worse than most because you are on the border. With us today are a few of the Republican candidates running to beat Mark Kelly next year. Thank you, Blake, good, you are doing well. Also with us, are Arizona's gubernatorial candidates, Matt Salmon. This could be a big night for you. I have to tell you, maybe the most pleasure I will get out of any introductions tonight because these guys are warriors. They love your state. They love this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5113, "text": "We are thrilled to be joined by several of our really best people in Congress. They happen to reside in a place called Arizona. First of all, Andy Biggs, where is Andy? You are so lucky to have these three guys. And a woman that I have fallen in love with and the first lady is very upset about it. What she did during the impeachment, especially the impeachment hoax number one, she made a name for herself. She did not do it for herself. She did it for this country. I actually said, Do we have our stars? They would not miss it. But I appreciate it. You are warriors and you love this country. When we win giant Republican victories and reclaim control over Congress and really reclaim it over our country, we will halt the radical Biden agenda in its tracks. By the way, remember, I used to say, it is going to be worse? He cannot believe it. They never talked about this. They never talked about closing up the pipeline the following day. He talked about, We are going to study it. We are going to look at it. No, he did that, got some votes and he closed it. How about the union where they endorsed Biden? And I said, You know you are going to get screwed, but they have always been with Democrats, but you know what? The voters are with me. The voters are with me and the workers. The workers are with me and with us, we will stop the federal takeover of elections and stop the Democrat attack on voter ID. Did you see the disinformation campaign? So they do a poll the other day and it showed voter ID, Andy, is it 88%, including Democrats, it is 88%. Everybody wants voter ID. Who does not want it? You go to the grocery store, you give a picture, do anything you do. You give a picture. Voter ID is at 88%. So here is their line, all of a sudden, we do not want a voter ID. Then one day they pass it on and the press plays along. We have always wanted voter ID. We have always wanted it. It is the Republicans who do not want it. And they had the same thing with defund the police. We want to defund the police. We will defund the police. Now crime is at the highest it is ever been in history.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5114, "text": "They have treated our great law enforcement, I just met a lot of them backstage, so badly with so little respect, but it is a very unpopular thing. They did not know that. Who the hell would not know that? I am telling you, they have got advantages, but they are dumb in a lot of ways, their policy is so bad. So now they are saying, you guys see that, It was the Republicans that wanted to defund the police. It is just like Russia, Russia, Russia. They make up stuff. I watched that shifty shift go up to the microphone. It is extremely important to save our country. ENTITY is a paid employee of Russia. And you know what they say, if they say it over and over and over again, in a year from now, a lot of people are not going to remember who wanted to defend the police and who did it. And they are not going to remember about voter ID, Andy. And we got to be careful with that. Paul, we got to be careful with that. You are not going to let it, but that is what they do. They make up a lot of crap and they say it over and over and over. The Republicans are against a very serious and a very sick enemy. We will end Joe Biden's war on American energy and ensure that the United States remains the dominant energy superpower on earth. Can you imagine they are out negotiated with OPEC again? We did not need OPEC. That is why I was taking everybody out of the Middle East because we needed the Middle East for oil. Now we need the Middle East for oil again. We will break up the big tech monopolies. And we will immediately shut down Joe Biden's border disaster. And we are going to end, by the way, catch and release. I ended catch and release. You catch a criminal and you take his name or whoever, you take his name, her name, and you release them into our country. You release them. We did something slightly better. We have stayed in Mexico. And we will restore our southern border. We want to remain, let them remain in Mexico. The people, they are all over the United States, your border, and you are getting hit hard, probably harder, much harder, but all over the country, you can go to Iowa. You can go to all over the country. Big crime wave is coming out of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5115, "text": "Right here in Arizona, Joe Biden has utterly demolished your border and cynically betrayed the people of the state because he never said he was going to do that. I told you he would. In May alone, border patrol encountered 540% more illegal migrants in the Tucson sector and 1500% more in Yuma than the same period when I was Think of that, 1500% more in one year. Now that does not mean as much as this for everyone you catch,, I think 10 come in. You are talking about millions of people are coming into our country. We expedited removals and deported criminal aliens by the thousands. We took out MS-13 gang members by the tens of thousands, we got them out. And we built nearly 500 miles of beautiful border wall. The same wall that they wanted. I went with them. I said, I do not want the anti-climb paddle on top. You know the paddle on top that you see? I said, I do not like it. I do not want it. I said, Oh, in that case, I like it. And they got to paint the wall, by the way, it sounds not so nice at a speech. How can Churchill make a great speech and say you got to paint the wall? Remember what I used to say? You have a new computer, three days later, you read it is obsolete. We achieved the most secure border in US history. Biden's open border policies have blown it all up in shreds so fast. And they have enriched the drug cartels, the child smugglers, the woman's smugglers, and the vicious MS-13 gang members. They are making more money with human trafficking now and drugs, the sale of drugs, we had fentanyl down to the lowest it is been in 15 years because it is not just people. We had it to the lowest. A small amount can kill a thousand people. A little amount can kill thousands of people. We had it to the lowest level it is been in 15 years and it was going down and now he blew the thing up. Why would not they have finished the wall? It would have taken two months. What are they doing? What are they doing? Last month alone, the remains of 43 people were tragically discovered along the Arizona border. Nearly 100 migrant children were found stranded in the sweltering, Arizona desert, having been cruelly enticed to the United States by Biden's rhetoric.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5116, "text": "And they heard that and they all started walking up and I said, You cannot come in. And we have 28,000 Mexican soldiers that are there. I said to the president of Mexico, who I like a lot, and he actually likes me. He is from a different persuasion. And I said, Mr. President, you are going to have to stop them because we are building the wall and they are coming in. And I worked out a deal. I said, I will not put tariffs on the thousands and thousands of cars you send over on a daily basis, but you have to put 28,000 soldiers on our border free of charge. And he said, I will do that. And those soldiers knew what they were doing. I will be honest with you, there were no games. We did a great job during the construction of the wall. Once the wall was up, you did not need them, but you have to finish the level empty areas of the wall. The flood of illegal immigrants is also placing a crushing burden on communities across the state and throughout the nation, depleting your already overcrowded schools and hospitals and public services of critical resources, you know that. They are so crowded now because there're so many people, many of them cannot speak English. Even before the Biden border crisis, Arizona taxpayers were spending a staggering $2.3 billion a year to pay for the welfare education justice system, course and illegal immigration, $1,000 per Arizona household every year. In our movement, we believe that your taxpayer dollars should go to support truly needing Americans. You have to take care of American citizens. And look, we all have a heart. I see the same thing as you do, and we want to help people. But when you say, Come up, come up, come to America, our country cannot afford it. We cannot afford it. You just cannot afford it. This is in Mexico and Guatemala and Honduras and El Salvador. They are coming in from Yemen. They are coming in from all over the Middle East. They are coming in from Haiti. Large numbers are coming in from Haiti. They are coming in from all parts of Africa. numbers are coming in from Haiti. They are coming in from all parts of Africa. They are coming in from Europe, they are coming in from all over the world. And our country's not, no country is set for that. Number one, you cannot afford it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5117, "text": "Number two, on a human basis and even on a common sense basis, it is going to destroy it. They are destroying our country. They are destroying our country. Under my Administration, America was respected again and respected like never before. We withdrew from the United Nations corrupt We withdrew from the United Nations corrupt Human Rights Council. So corrupt, which seemingly existed to criticize Israel and the United States. That is all they did was criticize us. But not only is Joe Biden, reentered the shameful and ridiculous international tribunal, but just this month you saw this, the Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, sent them a pandering and very, very strange letter begging to United Nations to come and investigate America for its alleged systematic racism. So you have systemic racism. I thought there is nothing, it is a joke about it. The Biden Administration's action is an outrageous insult to the American people and to our country. The United States of America is the most just and virtuous nation in the world in the history of the world. And I will tell you, you are not going to have a country very much longer. You are not going to have a country. Always I talk about, we can do this, we can do that. They are going to knock out the filibuster, you watch. I used to tell Mitch McConnell, you know what? You better knock out the filibuster and get everything approved, because they are going to do it. They will never do that, sir. Why will not they do it? Because it is bad for America. Do you think they care about America? And the first day they announced that they are going to knock the hell out of it, you watch. The two senators are going to do a folder, and you are going to have a big problem, especially in light of all of the disasters that Biden has caused. We should not be apologizing to the world. We are apologizing for America, just like Obama apologized. They should be apologizing to America for what they have done to it. That is all it is, is also making a mockery of our country right here at home. Earlier this year, Biden signed an executive order pushing toxic, Critical Race Theory into our children's schools and into our military. And it has no place in our schools, no place in our military and no place in our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5118, "text": "You remember, I ended it very rapidly with a very powerful executive order, but that executive order was immediately repealed and terminated by the radical left. A Republican Congress will defund it and ban it once and for all. They are going to ban it. In testimony before Congress, lightweight Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, actually defended the teaching of CRT, a Marxist ideology, to our men and women in uniform. Can you believe it? They are hearing this stuff, they are saying, I cannot believe what I am hearing. The soldiers are saying it. He said he wanted to quote, understand white rage. He wants to understand white rage. What the hell is he talking about that for? Our generals should not be focused on learning left wing ideology. They should be focused on defeating America's enemies and winning our future wars. Hopefully we do not have them, but if we do, we have to win them. And I say it, and I will say it, whatever. The only reason I appointed Mark Milley in the first place is because two of the world's most overrated generals, James Mattis and John Kelly could not stand him, had no respect for him and would not recommend him under any circumstances. They even tried to send him to Europe so he would not get the job. So when they did not like him, I said, Let us give this guy a shot. Last summer, when rioters were threatening to destroy Washington, DC, Milley practically begged me not to send in the military to stop the destruction. I was thinking about it. It is a big step to do it. Insurrection Act, big step to do it, but I was getting close, but he did not want to do it. He did not want to do that. Why would we ever want to do a thing like that? After walking, and I did plenty, I signed a executive order on statues. You knock down any of us statues, you go to jail for 10 years and it all stopped. We stopped it. When they were pulling down statues and then it got crazy They start pulling down statues of Abraham Lincoln. It would have never stopped, but I signed that order. And as soon as I signed that order, not one event took place. You get 10 years for even attempting to take it down. After walking with me to the smoldering church, they tried to burn the church down the day before, the smoke was still coming out of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5119, "text": "Milley issued a groveling apology because he caved to the press. He was afraid of the press. And it was really in order to take off the pressure again, is what they do to these people is they come after them through the media, through every way they can. All he had to do was say that I am proud to walk with anyone representing the President of the United States, and people would have understood that. And that was the end of him when he did that apology, that was the end of him, nothing to do with me. As the radicalization campaign in our military illustrates We are seeing almost every major institution in American life be taken over and weaponized by the extreme left, including law enforcement, the military, the corporate media. These people here just, you know, it is just I hope they are , more than anybody in this room, I hope they are listening because they are destroying our country. And especially the big tech companies, which are engaged in illegal censorship of the American people. It is a first step to restoring free speech in our country. This month, as you probably read, I filed a major class action lawsuit suit against big tech . We are suing Facebook, Twitter, and Google in Federal Court. And we will keep on fighting until we have reclaimed the sacred right of freedom of speech for every single citizen of this nation. What they do to the conservative voice, and again, they say private, but they have Section 230, which basically gives them immunity, that gives them no problems at all. We do not need lawyers. So once they do that, they have a right that nobody, Section 230, that no other company has anywhere in this country, so that no longer puts them in that category. And we can go after them and let us see what happens. But far worse than even big tech is the lame stream media, which is no longer free. That is all that you can say. You know that. And maybe I see it better because we can give them a statement that is so accurate and so proven. And then they write it the opposite. Whereas if you are a carpenter, you are an electrician, you are a worker, you are a lawyer, whatever you might do, you do not know that. You just think that what you are reading, they have the lowest rating right now, approval rating, in history, in the history of the rating business. They have their lowest rating, because people have gotten wise to them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5120, "text": "And I think it is something that in terms of legacy, I am very proud of what we have been able to do. I am very proud of it. Nobody had any idea the level of deception and corruptness. The media does not report the news anymore. They only report bad things about us and make it worse. They report bad things and they make it worse and good things about them and they make it much better. If there is anything bad about the other side, they never want to talk about it. They do not want to, you do not see it. They do not want to talk about it. Can you imagine if that were a Republican, if that were a conservative in some high level? As an example, the network nightly newscasts hardly ever discuss the crime rate, which is at an all time high. The disaster taking place at the border or Joe Biden's very slow vaccine rollout is very slow, very slow. They actually tried to take credit for the vaccine and that did not work out too well. They do not blame Biden for anything, including the fact that the virus is making an unexpected comeback and ravaging countries throughout the world. Only in a short time ago, it looked like it was going to be good, but nobody says it is Biden, does anybody say it is Biden's fault? And I am not even blaming him, but does anybody say it? That is why we are in the position we are in today. The radical left is determined to ruin everything in America. That is what they are doing. Woke politics takes the life and joy out of everything. Woke-ism makes you lose, ruins your mind and ruins you as a person. Earlier this week, they unexpectedly lost to Sweden, three to nothing, and Americans were happy about it. You proved that point before I even said it. Now the left is in the process of destroying our national pastime, baseball. First, we saw the embarrassing spectacle of the Commissioner of baseball, bowing to the radical left on voter fraud. You saw what they did. You saw they moved the All-Star game. Now one of the most beloved and storied franchises in baseball, all of baseball, I watched it as a kid at Yankee Stadium. The Cleveland Indians will be changing their name, a name that was filled with history and memories. Especially if you have a good team, the Cleveland Indians, it is one of the greatest names. People love it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5121, "text": "They are going absolutely crazy in Ohio over the name change. The Cleveland Guardians, what is that all about? The insanity of the left knows no bounds. They want to take away our history, our heritage, our culture, and everything that holds us together. By the way, remember when Bill Clinton was in Arizona, do you remember that? It was about 125 degrees out, sorry to bring that up. And he has a bad heart. And he said he was playing golf, but actually he was meeting on an airplane with the Attorney General discussing Hillary. I wonder what they were discussing. I was only there, I was only there to discuss my grandchildren and golf. He said he was out there to play golf, but it was about 121 degrees that day, which is a little hot. What is happening to our country has sadly happened to so many others. We are at the beginning of a communist system. Radicals are seizing power and destroying everything we hold dear as Americans and it is happening. They dismantle the rule of law, censor speech, take over the free press, imprison political opponents. Look at what I have been through for years. It was recently revealed that during the hand recount in Fulton County, Joe Biden had batches of ballots go for him. I got nothing. I got nothing. Even Fidel Castro only got 99%. So many of our state and local offices have been overtaken by corruption. The radical left install partisan Democrat prosecutors who are not interested in equal justice, but political justice. It is happening at a level that we have not seen this happen in many, many years. They would wield law enforcement against political opponents, inventing that never had been prosecuted before, while murderers and criminals walk free without prosecution at all, all over the streets of our cities in particular. They have turned our cities into Banana Republics where the innocent are persecuted while crime soars. Just look at what they have done in New York city. Innocent people are beaten in the streets daily. People are shot in Times Square. Rapes and murders are totally out of control. And yet what are the leftists and the attorney general and district attorney's offices working on so diligently? This is what they are working on so diligently and with such passion, it is get ENTITY. They campaign on getting ENTITY. Their campaign, we are going to get ENTITY. We are going to take down ENTITY. They do not talk about the murderers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5122, "text": "They do not talk about no cash bail. They do not talk about all these dangerous people walking the streets so people are afraid to come to New York. They are still coming after me because I will never stop fighting and winning for you. From the very beginning of our movement, we have been fighting against some of the most corrupt, powerful and entrenched forces imaginable. And now the Critical Race Theorists, all of them oppose our movement for a simple reason. We believe in putting America first. We believe in strong families, strong borders and strong sovereign nations. We believe in fair trade for the American worker. Look at what we did with the worst trade deal in the history of the world, NAFTA. Now we have the USMCA, and Mexico and Canada are not thrilled. That is a good sign by the way, but it is a great deal for us. And the stiff tariffs that I put on communist China, I tell you what, all they wanted to do is not have me put on tariffs. We are taking in billions and billions of dollars from China in tariffs and what was happening, our farmers with the trade deal that I made with China were doing phenomenal. They are doing now phenomenally because China is buying numbers that nobody's ever seen before, corn and soybeans, everything they are buying. Once the virus came in, I did not even talk about that trade deal. It meant nothing to me. It meant nothing to me. So sad for what is happened to our country. So said what happened to the world. We believe in low taxes, low regulations, unleashing American energy independence, and putting, we have to have independence with our energy. Think of what they are doing. Think of what they are doing. Look at what is happening at the pump. Nobody's ever seen anything like it. It is going up at a record pace, and you are going to be at $7 or $8 or $9 a gallon, and putting American jobs before the interests of foreign corporations. We believe in ending the endless foreign wars, rebuilding our military, supporting our warriors, taking care of our great veterans and bringing our troops back home, where they belong. And as you know, I started the move out of Afghanistan. I think it was impossible for him to stop it, but it was a much different deal. I told the Taliban, I spoke to the leader and I spoke. I said, let us call him Muhammad.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5123, "text": "But just in case, for any reason you decide to do something terrible to our country or beyond what is normal, because they have been fighting for a thousand years, in your country, we are going to come back and we are going to hit you harder than any country has ever been hit. And I told him that. This was a telephone conversation, had a number of them. I said, We are going to get along great, but I just have to make that statement. We are going to hit you harder than any country. This guy has been fighting from the time he is two years old. That is what they do. That is what they do. Russia did very poorly against them. Russia is Russia now, not the Soviet Union because of Afghanistan. I said, We are going to come back and hit you harder. I started off the conversation. Not a lot of social grace, but he was being nice. But I said, We are going to come back and hit you harder than any country has ever been hit. And your village, where I know you are and where you have everybody, that is going to be the point at which the first bomb is dropped I told him that, I told him. And he said to me, and I think he actually meant it. He said to me, I understand. And I believe beyond a deal, I believe we had a real understanding. We believe in patriotic education for our children. And we strongly oppose the radical indoctrination of America's youth. We are committed to defending innocent life, protecting our constitution, and to proudly upholding the Judeo-Christian values of our nation's founding. We embrace free thought. We stand up to political correctness. We do not like political correctness. And we reject the intolerance of left wing cancel culture. We believe in law and order, and we respect and support the men and women of law enforcement, and above all we live by the words of our national motto and it will never ever change, In God We Trust. Sustained by these timeless American values and powered by the strength of these unstoppable ideas, we will press forward. We will have victory after victory. And Charlie, I want to thank you. What a joy you have done, what a job you have done. And to the devoted citizens all across our country, is so much greater than our opponents can even imagine. We have massive majorities and we are much stronger than them, much stronger than them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpphoenixarizonarallyspeechtranscriptjuly24", "title": "Donald Trump Phoenix, Arizona Rally Speech Transcript July 24", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-phoenix-arizona-rally-speech-transcript-july-24", "publication_date": "24-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5145, "text": "On Monday I met with the congressional leadership to discuss the drought that has afflicted so many thousands of acres of our farmland and that has already touched so many Americans' lives. Tomorrow I will be flying out to Illinois and Iowa to see the effects of the drought for myself. But when I heard that you were going to be here in Washington, I decided to take this day to meet with you, you who are in so many ways the leaders of American agriculture. First, let me say our administration is committed to taking whatever actions are necessary to protect America's farmers from excessive losses during this drought. Already we have taken a number of actions. We have formed an interagency drought policy committee to coordinate Federal action. The ENTITY Corps of Engineers is working hard to keep traffic moving on the Mississippi River and elsewhere in spite of some of the lowest water levels in history. And in order to help livestock owners, Secretary Lyng has permitted grazing on set-aside lands. And now is the time to start work on legislation to help the many crop farmers who will suffer substantial losses. At my direction, Secretary Lyng has been working closely with the leadership of the House and Senate Agriculture Committees in an effort to draft timely legislation. We have sought to make this a bipartisan effort, and so far I am pleased by the cooperation that we have received. Permit me to outline the five points we are seeking in this drought legislation. First, relief should go to those who need it most. Second, many of our farmers purchased Federal crop insurance, a sound business decision. They should not be penalized relative to farmers who-did not act with such prudence. Third, this legislation should not force farmers to do unreasonable things. No program should, for example, include any incentive for a farmer to plow under his crops. Fourth, drought relief spending has to be considered in the context of our efforts to reduce the Federal deficit; and according to the November 1987 bipartisan budget agreement that we reached with Congress, to put it very simply, we mustn't bust the budget. The automatic budget sequestration cuts that overspending triggers would take back from farmers with one hand what we are providing in drought relief with the other. And finally, this humanitarian assistance should not be used as a means to other ends. Extraneous matters, such as rewriting the existing farm bill, will only deter our efforts to provide this much-needed aid. Now permit me to tell you just where our efforts stand.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthestatepresidentstheamericanfarmbureaufederation", "title": "Remarks to the State Presidents of the American Farm Bureau Federation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-state-presidents-the-american-farm-bureau-federation", "publication_date": "13-07-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5146, "text": "Yesterday, after long consultations with Secretary Lyng, bipartisan legislation that meets these goals was introduced in both the House and Senate. Secretary Lyng will continue to work with the House and Senate Agriculture Committees as they mark up the drought relief package to ensure that this bipartisan, bicameral cooperation continues. And yet, even as the drought continues, we would do well to look beyond it to the long-range future of American agriculture. We all know that American farmers are more than competitive in world markets-if only those world markets give our farmers the chance to compete fairly. And this is why, under Secretary Lyng and Ambassador Clayton Yeutters guidance, we are working to increase our agricultural exports by making world trade freer and much more fair. Last July we presented at the Uruguay round in Geneva a proposal that I described as-and by the way, that is one of the best parts of this job is that from time to time you get to quote yourself but I described our proposal as the most ambitious proposal for world agricultural trade ever offered. Our proposal calls for nothing less than a total phaseout by the year 2000 of all policies that distort trade in agriculture. The solution to the world agricultural problem is to get government out of the way and let farmers compete. It is true, of course, that getting rid of all export subsidies, import barriers, and the like-all the things that make it harder for our farmers to compete in world markets-is a very tall order; but we are not backing down. At the economic summit in Toronto last month, we were able to persuade the heads of state that, at the Montreal midterm review meeting, their trade ministers must reach agreement on a goal and a timetable for completing the Uruguay round. And I can tell you after nearly 8 years of working with these heads of state, setting a deadline, a time when the talking has to stop and the action has to begin, is a very powerful instrument for getting things done. I know that you support our agricultural proposal for freer and fairer world markets. And I thank you for that support, just as I give you my heartfelt thanks for your support on a host of other things, including the textile bill and the U.S.-Canada free trade agreement. And I ask you to continue to work to help the farmers who're suffering as a result of the drought.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthestatepresidentstheamericanfarmbureaufederation", "title": "Remarks to the State Presidents of the American Farm Bureau Federation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-state-presidents-the-american-farm-bureau-federation", "publication_date": "13-07-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5151, "text": "I am deeply gratified by the generous reception you have accorded me. It makes me look back with a touch of regret to former occasions when I have stood in this place and enjoyed a greater liberty than is granted me to-day. There have been times when I stood in this spot and said what I really thought, and I can not help praying that those days of indulgence may be accorded me again. I have come here to-day, of course, somewhat restrained by a sense of responsibility which I can not escape. For I take the Associated Press very seriously. I know the enormous part that you play in the affairs not only of this country but of the world. You deal in the raw material of opinion and, if my convictions have any validity, opinion ultimately governs the world. It is, therefore, of very serious things that I think as I face this body of men. I do not think of you, however, as members of the Associated Press. I do not think of you as men of different parties or of different racial derivations or of different religious denominations. I want to talk to you as to my fellow citizens of the United States, for there are serious things which as fellow citizens we ought to consider. The times behind us, gentlemen, have been difficult enough; the times before us are likely to be more difficult still, because, whatever may be said about the present condition of the world's affairs, it is clear that they are drawing rapidly to a climax, and at the climax the test will come, not only for the nations engaged in the present colossal struggle-it will come to them, of course-but the test will come for us particularly. Do you realize that, roughly speaking, we are the only great Nation at present disengaged? I am not speaking, of course, with disparagement of the greatness of those nations in Europe which are not parties to the present war, but I am thinking of their close neighborhood to it. I am thinking how their lives much more than ours touch the very heart and stuff of the business, whereas we have rolling between us and those bitter days across the water 3, 000 miles of cool and silent ocean. Our atmosphere is not yet charged with those disturbing elements which must permeate every nation of Europe. Therefore, is it not likely that the nations of the world will some day turn to us for the cooler assessment of the elements engaged?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpressluncheonnewyorkcity", "title": "Address at the Associated Press Luncheon in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-luncheon-new-york-city", "publication_date": "20-04-1915", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5152, "text": "I am not now thinking so preposterous a thought as that we should sit in judgment upon them-no nation is fit to sit in judgment upon any other nation-but that we shall some day have to assist in reconstructing the processes of peace. Our resources are untouched; we are more and more becoming by the force of circumstances the mediating Nation of the world in respect of its finance. We must make up our minds what are the best things to do and what are the best ways to do them. We must put our money, our energy, our enthusiasm, our sympathy into these things, and we must have our judgments prepared and our spirits chastened against the coming of that day. So that I am not speaking in a selfish spirit when I say that our whole duty, for the present at any rate, is summed up in this motto, America first. Let us think of America before we think of Europe, in order that America may be fit to be Europe's friend when the day of tested friendship comes. The test of friendship is not now sympathy with the one side or the other, but getting ready to help both sides when the struggle is over. The basis of neutrality, gentlemen, is not indifference; it is not self-interest. The basis of neutrality is sympathy for mankind. It is fairness, it is good will, at bottom. It is impartiality of spirit and of judgment. I wish that all of our fellow citizens could realize that. Men are even uttering slanders against the United States, as if to excite her. Men are saying that if we should go to war upon either side there would be a divided America-an abominable libel of ignorance! America is not all of it vocal just now. It is vocal in spots, but I, for one, have a complete and abiding faith in that great silent body of Americans who are not standing up and shouting and expressing their opinions just now, but are waiting to find out and support the duty of America. I am just as sure of their solidity and of their loyalty and of their unanimity, if we act justly, as I am that the history of this country has at every crisis and turning point illustrated this great lesson. We are the mediating Nation of the world. I do not mean that we undertake not to mind our own business and to mediate where other people are quarreling. I mean the word in a broader sense.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpressluncheonnewyorkcity", "title": "Address at the Associated Press Luncheon in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-luncheon-new-york-city", "publication_date": "20-04-1915", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5153, "text": "We are compounded of the nations of the world; we mediate their blood, we mediate their traditions, we mediate their sentiments, their tastes, their passions; we are ourselves compounded of those things. We are, therefore, able to understand all nations; we are able to understand them in the compound, not separately, as partisans, but unitedly as knowing and comprehending and embodying them all. It is in that sense that I mean that America is a mediating Nation. The opinion of America, the action of America, is ready to turn, and free to turn, in any direction. Did you ever reflect upon how almost every other nation has through long centuries been headed in one direction? That is not true of the United States. The United States has no racial momentum. It has no history back of it which makes it run all its energies and all its ambitions in one particular direction. And America is particularly free in this, that she has no hampering ambitions as a world power. We do not want a foot of anybody's territory. If we have been obliged by circumstances, or have considered ourselves to be obliged by circumstances, in the past, to take territory which we otherwise would not have thought of taking, I believe I am right in saying that we have considered it our duty to administer that territory, not for ourselves but for the people living in it, and to put this burden upon our consciences-not to think that this thing is ours for our use, but to regard ourselves as trustees of the great business for those to whom it does really belong, trustees ready to hand it over to the cestui que trust at any time when the business seems to make that possible and feasible. That is what I mean by saying we have no hampering ambitions. We do not want anything that does not belong to us. Is not a nation in that position free to serve other nations, and is not a nation like that ready to form some part of the assessing opinion of the world? My interest in the neutrality of the United States is not the petty desire to keep out of trouble. To judge by my experience, I have never been able to keep out of trouble. I have never looked for it, but I have always found it. I do not want to walk around trouble. If any man wants a scrap that is an interesting scrap and worth while, I am his man.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpressluncheonnewyorkcity", "title": "Address at the Associated Press Luncheon in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-luncheon-new-york-city", "publication_date": "20-04-1915", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5154, "text": "I warn him that he is not going to draw me into the scrap for his advertisement, but if he is looking for trouble that is the trouble of men in general and I can help a little, why, then, I am in for it. But I am interested in neutrality because there is something so much greater to do than fight; there is a distinction waiting for this Nation that no nation has ever yet got. That is the distinction of absolute self-control and self-mastery. Whom do you admire most among your friends? The man out of whom you can get a rise without trying? The man who will fight at the drop of the hat, whether he knows what the hat is dropped for or not? Do not you admire and do not you fear, if you have to contest with him, the self-mastered man who watches you with calm eye and comes in only when you have carried the thing so far that you must be disposed of? That is the man who, you know, has at bottom a much more fundamental and terrible courage than the irritable, fighting man. There is news and news. There is what is called news from Turtle Bay that turns out to be falsehood, at any rate in what it is said to signify, but which, if you could get the Nation to believe it true, might disturb our equilibrium and our self-possession. We ought not to deal in stuff of that kind. We ought not to permit that sort of thing to use up the electrical energy of the wires, because its energy is malign, its energy is not of the truth, its energy is of mischief. It is possible to sift truth. I have known some things to go out on the wires as true when there was only one man or one group of men who could have told the originators of that report whether it was true or not, and they were not asked whether it was true or not for fear it might not be true. That sort of report ought not to go out over the wires. There is generally, if not always, somebody who knows whether the thing is so or not, and in these days, above all over days, we ought to take particular pains to resort to the one small group of men, or to the one man if there be but one, who knows whether those things are true or not.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpressluncheonnewyorkcity", "title": "Address at the Associated Press Luncheon in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-luncheon-new-york-city", "publication_date": "20-04-1915", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5155, "text": "The world ought to know the truth; the world ought not at this period of unstable equilibrium to be disturbed by rumor, ought not to be disturbed by imaginative combinations of circumstances, or, rather, by circumstances stated in combination which do not belong in combination. You gentlemen, and gentlemen engaged like you, are holding the balances in your hand. This unstable equilibrium rests upon scales that are in your hands. For the food of opinion, as I began by saying, is the news of the day. I have known many a man to go off at a tangent on information that was not reliable. Indeed, that describes the majority of men. The world is held stable by the man who waits for the next day to find out whether the report was true or not. We can not afford, therefore, to let the rumors of irresponsible persons and origins get into the atmosphere of the United States. We are trustees for what I venture to say is the greatest heritage that any nation ever had, the love of justice and righteousness and human liberty. For, fundamentally, those are the things to which America is addicted and to which she is devoted. There are groups of selfish men in the United States, there are coteries, where sinister things are purposed, but the great heart of the American people is just as sound and true as it ever was. And it is a single heart; it is the heart of America. It is not a heart made up of sections selected out of other countries. What I try to remind myself of every day when I am almost overcome by perplexities, what I try to remember, is what the people at home are thinking about. I try to put myself in the place of the man who does not know all the things that I know and ask myself what he would like the policy of this country to be. Not the talkative man, not the partisan man, not the man who remembers first that he is a Republican or a Democrat, or that his parents were German or English, but the man who remembers first that the whole destiny of modern affairs centers largely upon his being an American first of all. If I permitted myself to be a partisan in this present struggle, I would be unworthy to represent you. If I permitted myself to forget the people who are not partisans, I would be unworthy to be your spokesman. I am not sure that I am worthy to represent you, but I do claim this degree of worthiness-that before everything else I love America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpressluncheonnewyorkcity", "title": "Address at the Associated Press Luncheon in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-luncheon-new-york-city", "publication_date": "20-04-1915", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5156, "text": "Let me start by thanking Michael for his work and for that kind introduction. And I want to also thank Dawn Sweeny and everyone at the National Restaurant Association for having me here. It is a pleasure for me to be with you all. So today I am going to talk about food, which is something that all of you here today know a little bit about. Together, you represent 40 percent of the nearly one million restaurants in the United States, from the biggest chains to the smallest diners. You know what Americans like to eat and what they do not . You have seen how the ingredients we put in our bodies affect the way we feel and the way we feel about ourselves. And you also understand the unique role that food, and restaurants especially, play in our own lives and in the life of our nation. Restaurants have always been places to celebrate a special occasion or mark an important milestone, to bond with new friends and grow closer as a family. They provide a service to our communities unlike any other. And even as tastes and customs have changed over time, restaurants remain an incredibly dynamic part of our American story. And today, one out of every two dollars spent on food in this country goes towards meals outside the home -- and that is double what it was just 50 years ago. And one-third of all meals today are eaten in restaurants. So it is clear that eating out has become part of our American way of life. And while restaurants are still places where we go to mark a special occasion -- to celebrate a good report card, an anniversary, a job well done -- restaurants are not just for those who can afford to splurge anymore. Instead, they have grown to fit every lifestyle and every budget. And our eating habits have evolved over time as well -- both in restaurants and at home -- but not always in ways that are good for our health. And that is another reason I wanted to talk to you today -- about an issue that is near and dear to my heart not just as First Lady, but as a mother -- and that is the epidemic of childhood obesity in America today. how one in three children in this country is overweight or obese. And you know the consequences for their health -- from hypertension and diabetes to heart disease and even cancer. the billions of dollars we spend every year treating obesity-related conditions -- costs that you pay in the form of rising health insurance premiums.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefirstladyaddressthenationalrestaurantassociationmeeting", "title": "Michelle Obama Remarks by the First Lady in Address to the National Restaurant Association Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-first-lady-address-the-national-restaurant-association-meeting", "publication_date": "13-09-2010", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Michele Obama"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 5157, "text": "So it is clear that we are facing a problem that is really big. And it is also clear that this problem has a whole range of different causes. Our kids are spending less time outside and more time on the couch in front of the TV, video games, the Internet. At school, gym classes, recess, they have been eliminated or shortened. Portion sizes in this country have ballooned. In some areas, families are having a tougher time getting regular access to fresh produce. And kids these days are consuming more calories and eating more fat and sugar than ever before. We want to solve the problem of childhood obesity in a generation, so that kids born today can reach adulthood at a healthy weight. And Let us Move! is about attacking this problem from all different angles. It is about giving parents the information and the resources they need to make healthy decisions for their families. It is about giving grocery stores -- helping them to locate in underserved areas, so that every community has access to fresh and nutritious food. It is about getting healthier food into our schools. It is about helping our kids become more active, not just in school but at home. Even if we give parents all the information they need and we improve school meals and build brand new supermarkets on every corner, none of that matters if when families step into a restaurant, they cannot make a healthy choice. And the truth is that while restaurants are offering more options and families take advantage of them more often, they are not always the healthiest choices. Research has shown that kids consume more saturated fat and less fiber and calcium when they eat out. And the meals they eat at restaurants have twice as many calories as the ones they eat at home. Now, as parents we know that many of our kids are not as healthy and active as they should be. And we desperately want to do things differently. But when stores and restaurants do not offer healthy options, or when parents do not have the information to make the best choices for their families, that is easier said than done. And as America's restaurant owners, you are responsible for one-third of the calories our kids get on a daily basis. The choices you make determine what is listed on the menus, what is advertised on billboards, and what is served on our plates. And your decisions about how a dish is prepared, what goes into it and where is it placed on the menu, that can have a real impact on the way people eat.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefirstladyaddressthenationalrestaurantassociationmeeting", "title": "Michelle Obama Remarks by the First Lady in Address to the National Restaurant Association Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-first-lady-address-the-national-restaurant-association-meeting", "publication_date": "13-09-2010", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Michele Obama"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 5158, "text": "And that is why we need your help. And we need your help now, because when you see research showing that obese toddlers already display some warning signs for heart disease, it is clear that we just do not have the time to waste. And that is why I have been so pleased to hear about what some of you are doing already both in working with us and on your own. Here at the NRA, you have developed the Food and Healthy Living Initiative to give restaurants a strong foundation for making healthy changes. You have launched a website, Healthydiningfinder.com, to help consumers identify healthy menu options in their area. You are keeping your members up to date with the latest information and statistics about efforts to address childhood obesity. And you are working with other groups in the industry to meet the goal of doubling the amount of produce used in the food industry over the next 10 years. And across the country, individual restaurants and chains are also focusing on our children's health -- not just because it is the right thing to do, but because it also makes sense for their bottom line. Right now, many restaurants are making a point to offer fresh produce and healthy choices aimed at kids and adults. Others are serving more low-fat dishes, whole grain breads, fruit on the side. Some are even offering kid-size portions of the meals they serve on the main menu. And chefs across the country are partnering with local schools to help them make healthy choices. Together we have to do more. And we need your help to lead this effort. Now, what I do know is that in the restaurant industry creativity is your lifeblood. It is what sets you apart from the competition, and it keeps customers coming back for more. And today I am asking you to use that creativity to rethink the food you offer, especially dishes aimed at young people, and to help us make the healthier choice the easier choice. First, it is important to reduce the number of empty calories that our families are consuming, calories that have no nutritional benefit whatsoever. And believe me, I know this is easier said than done. After all, we as humans, we are programmed to crave sugary, fatty, salty foods. And as people who work to meet those needs, I know it is tempting to respond by creating products that are sweeter, richer and saltier than ever before. See, feeding those cravings does just respond to people's natural desires, it actually helps shape them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefirstladyaddressthenationalrestaurantassociationmeeting", "title": "Michelle Obama Remarks by the First Lady in Address to the National Restaurant Association Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-first-lady-address-the-national-restaurant-association-meeting", "publication_date": "13-09-2010", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Michele Obama"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 5159, "text": "The more of these foods people eat, the more they are accustomed to that taste, and after a while, those unhealthy foods become a permanent part of their eating habits. It can work the other way around just as easily. Just as we can shape our children's preferences for high-calorie, low-nutrient foods, with a little persistence and creativity we can also turn them on to higher quality, healthier foods. It starts with offering healthier options designed specifically for kids. And today, no matter what kind of restaurant you visit -- whether it is Italian, French, Mexican, American -- most kids' menus look pretty much the same. And trust me, we have seen a lot of them. One local survey found that 90 percent of those menus includes mac and cheese -- our children's favorite; 80 percent includes chicken fingers; 60 includes burgers or cheeseburgers. Some options weigh in at over 1,000 calories, and that is close to the recommended amount that a child should have for the entire day. And I think -- and I know you all think -- that our kids deserve better than that. That is why I want to challenge every restaurant to offer healthy menu options and then provide them up front so that parents do not have to hunt around and read the small print to find an appropriately sized portion that does not contain levels -- high levels of fat, salt and sugar. These choices have to be easy to make and they have to give parents the confidence to know that they can go into any restaurant in this country and choose a genuinely healthy meal for their kids. It is not easy to come up with choices that are both healthy and palatable for kids. And it may mean putting in some real effort and creativity to make this happen. But what it does not mean is providing just one token healthy option on the menu, or taking out one problematic ingredient and replacing it with another. And it is not about finding creative ways to market unhealthy food products as healthy. Instead, it is about producing products that actually are healthy; products that can help our children get into the habits that will last them a lifetime. This philosophy also needs to apply to the rest of the food that you offer, because just as we eat out as a family, we also should be able to eat well as a family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefirstladyaddressthenationalrestaurantassociationmeeting", "title": "Michelle Obama Remarks by the First Lady in Address to the National Restaurant Association Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-first-lady-address-the-national-restaurant-association-meeting", "publication_date": "13-09-2010", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Michele Obama"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 5160, "text": "And as a mother of two soon-to-be teenagers, I know that many kids, especially tweens and teens, eat off the same menu that their parents do. I am not asking any of you to make drastic changes to every single one of your recipes or to totally change the way you do business. But what I am asking is that you consider reformulating your menu in pragmatic and incremental ways to create healthier versions of the foods that we all love. That could mean substituting wheat pasta for white pasta in your regular recipes, or taking out an existing -- taking an existing dish and cutting the amount of butter or cream -- not enough to sacrifice flavor -- we all like flavor -- but just enough to make a meaningful difference in the amount of calories and fat. It could mean serving 1 percent or skim milk. Or you could make healthy sides like apple slices or carrots the default choice in a menu and make fries something customers have to request -- which would hurt me deeply. And no matter what you do, it is also important, truly important, to keep portion sizes in check, because we all know that the size of a meal is just as important as the ingredients it is made of. But your role in helping address childhood obesity is not limited to what you put on your menus and how you label them for parents. It is also about how you market those products to our kids. Our kids do not learn about the latest fast-food creations on their own. They hear about them on TV, advertisements, in the Internet, video games, and many other places. As a mom, I know it is my responsibility, and no one else's, to raise my kids. But we have to ask ourselves, what does it mean when so many parents are finding their best efforts undermined by an avalanche of advertisements aimed at our kids. A study last year found that only a small percentage of advertising aimed at kids promoted healthy foods, while most promoted foods with a low nutritional value. It is not enough just to limit ads for foods that are not healthy. It is also going to be critical to increase marketing for foods that are healthy. And if there is anyone who can sell healthy food to our kids, it is all of you, because you know what gets their attention. You know what makes a lasting impression. You certainly know what gets them to drive their poor parents crazy because they just have to have something.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefirstladyaddressthenationalrestaurantassociationmeeting", "title": "Michelle Obama Remarks by the First Lady in Address to the National Restaurant Association Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-first-lady-address-the-national-restaurant-association-meeting", "publication_date": "13-09-2010", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Michele Obama"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 5161, "text": "So I am here today to ask you to use that knowledge and that power to our kids' advantage. I am asking you to actively promote healthy foods and healthy habits to our kids. Again, I know many of you have said that you would offer and promote healthy options in a heartbeat if they were as popular as the healthy -- unhealthy options, because that is how business works, and I understand that. But I have yet to meet a single parent who does not understand the threat of childhood obesity. I have yet to meet a single parent who is not eager to buy healthier products. They just need more information. They need easier access to those products. And I have heard from more companies over the year that the market is starting to move in a healthier direction. Folks are beginning to ask for more fruits and vegetables and for smaller portions. So when it comes right down to it, this is also about protecting your bottom lines and meeting the demands of your customers -- customers who I know you want to keep coming back again and again. That is why we are committed to helping increase that demand and making it easier for you to do what is right. And we have started by requiring chain restaurants to provide calorie counts on their menus and menu boards. And I am grateful for the support we have received from the NRA to get this done. And I want to encourage restaurants that are not providing calorie counts to join us in this effort. And because so many of the calories our kids consume come from school, we are also working to get more nutritious food into our lunchrooms and our vending machines. And, again, the NRA has been playing an important role in these efforts as well. As part of Let us Move, we are setting a goal of doubling the number of schools that participate in the Healthier US Schools Challenge by next year. And we are working with schools and food suppliers to offer more fruits and vegetables and to cut down on that fat, sugar and salt. And, finally, we are working with mayors and other local officials to make our cities and towns healthier and to highlight restaurants that agree to serve smaller portions and promote more nutritious options. So I hope that all of you will join with us in these efforts. Together, we can help make sure that every family that walks into a restaurant can make an easy, healthy choice. We can make a commitment to promote vegetables and fruits and whole grains on every part of every menu.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefirstladyaddressthenationalrestaurantassociationmeeting", "title": "Michelle Obama Remarks by the First Lady in Address to the National Restaurant Association Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-first-lady-address-the-national-restaurant-association-meeting", "publication_date": "13-09-2010", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Michele Obama"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 5171, "text": "ENTITY gave a speech on July 3 at a Fourth of July firework event at Mt. Rushmore in South Dakota. Governor Noem, Secretary Bernhardt, we very much appreciate it. As we begin this 4th of July weekend, the First Lady and I would wish each and every one of you a very, very happy Independence Day. Let us show our appreciation to the South Dakota ENTITY and Air National Guard and the Air Force for inspiring us with that magnificent display of American air power, and of course our gratitude as always to the legendary and very talented Blue Angels. Let us also send you our deepest thanks to our wonderful veterans, law enforcement, first responders, and the doctors, nurses, and scientists working tirelessly to kill the virus. I want to thank them very, very much. We are grateful as well to your state's congressional delegation. We appreciate it. There could be no better place to celebrate America's independence than beneath this magnificent, incredible majestic mountain and monument to the greatest Americans who have ever lived. Today we pay tribute to the exceptional lives and extraordinary legacies of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Teddy Roosevelt. I am here as your president to proclaim before the country and before the world, this monument will never be desecrated, these heroes will never be defamed, their legacy will never ever be destroyed, their achievements will never be forgotten, and Mount Rushmore will stand forever as an eternal tribute to our forefathers and to our freedom. We gather tonight to herald the most important day in the history of nations, July 4th, 1776. At those words, every American heart should swell with pride, every American family should cheer with delight, and every American patriot should be filled with joy because each of you lives in the most magnificent country in the history of the world and it will soon be greater than ever before. Our founders launched not only a revolution in government, but a revolution in the pursuit of justice, equality, liberty, and prosperity. No nation has done more to advance the human condition than the United States of America and no people have done more to promote human progress than the citizens of our great nation. It was all made possible by the courage of 56 patriots who gathered in Philadelphia 244 years ago and signed the Declaration of Independence. They enshrined a divine truth that changed the world forever when they said, All men are created equal. These immortal words set in motion the unstoppable march of freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5172, "text": "Our founders boldly declared that we are all endowed with the same divine rights, given us by our Creator in Heaven, and that which God has given us, we will allow no one ever to take away ever. 1776 represented the culmination of thousands of years of Western civilization and the triumph of not only spirit, but of wisdom, philosophy, and reason. And yet, as we meet here tonight, there is a growing danger that threatens every blessing our ancestors fought so hard for, struggled, they bled to secure. Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials, and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities. Many of these people have no idea why they are doing this, but some know what they are doing. They think the American people are weak and soft and submissive, but no, the American people are strong and proud and they will not allow our country and all of its values, history, and culture to be taken from them. One of their political weapons is cancel culture, driving people from their jobs, shaming dissenters, and demanding total submission from anyone who disagrees. This is the very definition of totalitarianism, and it is completely alien to our culture and to our values and it has absolutely no place in the United States of America. This attack on our liberty, our magnificent liberty must be stopped and it will be stopped very quickly. We will expose this dangerous movement, protect our nation's children from this radical assault, and preserve our beloved American way of life. In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance. If you do not speak its language, perform its rituals, recite its mantras, and follow its commandments, then you will be censored, banished, blacklisted, persecuted, and punished. It is not going to happen to us. This left-wing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution. In so doing they would destroy the very civilization that rescued billions from poverty, disease, violence, and hunger, and that lifted humanity to new heights of achievement, discovery, and progress. To make this possible, they are determined to tear down every statue, symbol, and memory of our national heritage.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5173, "text": "That is why I am deploying federal law enforcement to protect our monuments, arrest the rioters, and prosecutors offenders to the fullest extent of the law. I am pleased to report that yesterday, federal agents arrested the suspected ringleader of the attack on the statue of the great Andrew Jackson in Washington, D.C., and in addition, hundreds more have been arrested. Under the executive order I signed last week pertaining to the Veterans Memorial Preservation Memorial and Recognition Act and other laws, people who damage or deface federal statues or monuments will get a minimum of 10 years in prison and obviously that includes our beautiful Mount Rushmore. Our people have a great memory. They will never forget the destruction of statues and monuments to George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, abolitionists and many others. The violent mayhem we have seen in the streets and cities that are run by liberal Democrats in every case is the predictable result of years of extreme indoctrination and bias in education, journalism, and other cultural institutions. Against every law of society and nature, our children are taught in school to hate their own country and to believe that the men and women who built it were not heroes but that were villains. The radical view of American history is a web of lies, all perspective is removed, every virtue is obscured, every motive is twisted, every fact is distorted and every flaw is magnified until the history is purged and the record is disfigured beyond all recognition. This movement is openly attacking the legacies of every person on Mount Rushmore. They defiled the memory of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Roosevelt. Today we will set history and history's record straight. Before these figures were immortalized in stone, they were American giants in full flesh and blood, gallant men, whose intrepid deeds unleashed the greatest leap of human advancement the world has ever known. Tonight I will tell you and most importantly the youth of our nation the true stories of these great, great men. From head to toe George Washington represented the strength, grace, and dignity of the American people. From a small volunteer force of citizen farmers, he created the Continental ENTITY out of nothing and rallied them to stand against the most powerful military on earth. Through eight long years, through the brutal winter at Valley Forge, through setback after setback on the field of battle, he led those patriots to ultimate triumph.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5174, "text": "When the army had dwindled to a few thousand men at Christmas of 1776, when defeat seemed absolutely certain, he took what remained of his forces on a daring nighttime crossing of the Delaware River. They marched through nine miles of frigid darkness, many without boots on their feet, leaving a trail of blood in the snow. In the morning, they seized victory at Trenton after forcing the surrender of the most powerful empire on the planet at Yorktown, General Washington did not claim power but simply returned to Mount Vernon as a private citizen. When called upon again, he presided over the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia and was unanimously elected our first president. When he stepped down after two terms, his former adversary, King George called him the greatest man of the age. He remains first in our hearts to this day, for as long as Americans love this land, we will honor and cherish the father of our country, George Washington. He will never be removed, abolished, and most of all, he will never be forgotten. Thomas Jefferson, the great Thomas Jefferson, was 33 years old when he traveled north to Pennsylvania and brilliantly authored one of the greatest treasures of human history, the Declaration of Independence. He also drafted Virginia's constitution and conceived and wrote the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, a model for our cherished First Amendment. After serving as the first Secretary of State, and then Vice President, he was elected to the presidency. He ordered American warriors to crush Barbary pirates. He doubled the size of our nation with the Louisiana Purchase and he sent the famous explorers Lewis and Clark into the west on a daring expedition to the Pacific Ocean. He was an architect, an inventor, a diplomat, a scholar, the founder of one of the world's great universities and an ardent defender of liberty. Americans will forever admire the author of American freedom, Thomas Jefferson, and he too will never, ever be abandoned by us. Abraham Lincoln, the savior of our union, was a self-taught country lawyer who grew up in a log cabin on the American frontier. The first Republican president, he rose to high office from obscurity based on a force and clarity of his anti-slavery convictions. He signed the law that built the Trans-Continental Railroad.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5175, "text": "He signed the Homestead Act given to some incredible scholars as simply defined ordinary citizens free land to settle anywhere in the American West, and he led the country through the darkest hours of American history, giving every ounce of strength that he had to ensure that government of the people, by the people and for the people did not perish from this earth. He served as commander in chief of the U.S. Armed Forces during our bloodiest war, the struggle that saved our union and extinguished the evil of slavery. Over 600,000 died in that war, more than 20, 000 were killed or wounded in a single day in Antietam. At Gettysburg 157 years ago, the Union bravely withstood an assault of nearly 15,000 men and threw back Pickett's Charge. Lincoln won the Civil War. He issued the Emancipation Proclamation. He led the passage of the 13th Amendment, abolishing slavery for all-time and ultimately his determination to preserve our nation and our union cost him his life. For as long as we live, Americans will uphold and revere the immortal memory of President Abraham Lincoln. Theodore Roosevelt exemplified the unbridled confidence of our national culture and identity. He saw the towering grandeur of America's mission in the world and he pursued it with overwhelming energy and zeal. As a Lieutenant Colonel during the Spanish-American War, he led the famous Rough Riders to defeat the enemy at San Juan Hill. He cleaned up corruption as police commissioner of New York City, then served as the Governor of New York, Vice President, and at 42 years old, became the youngest ever President of the United States. He sent our great new naval fleet around the globe to announce America's arrival as a world power. He gave us many of our national parks, including the Grand Canyon. He oversaw the construction of the awe-inspiring Panama Canal and he is the only person ever awarded both the Nobel Peace Prize and the Congressional Medal of Honor. The American people will never relinquish the bold, beautiful and untamed spirit of Theodore Roosevelt. No movement that seeks to dismantle these treasured American legacies can possibly have a love of America at its heart. No person who remains quiet at the destruction of this resplendent heritage can possibly lead us to a better future. The radical ideology attacking our country advances under the banner of social justice, but in truth, it would demolish both justice and society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5176, "text": "It would transform justice into an instrument of division and vengeance and it would turn our free and inclusive society into a place of a repression, domination, and exclusion. They want to silence us, but we will not be silenced. We will state the truth in full without apology. We declare that the United States of America is the most just and exceptional nation ever to exist on earth. We are proud of the fact that our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles and we understand that these values have dramatically advanced the cause of peace and justice throughout the world. We know that the American family is the bedrock of American life. We recognize the solemn right and moral duty of every nation to secure its borders and we are building the wall. We remember that governments exist to protect the safety and happiness of their own people. A nation must care for its own citizens first. We must take care of America first. We believe in equal opportunity, equal justice, and equal treatment for citizens of every race, background, religion and creed. Every child of every color, born and unborn, is made in the holy image of God. We want free and open debate, not speech codes and cancel culture. We embrace tolerance, not prejudice. We support the courageous men and women of law enforcement. We will never abolish our police or our great Second Amendment which gives us the right to keep and bear arms. We believe that our children should be taught to love their country, honor their history, and respect our great American flag. We stand tall, we stand proud, and we only kneel to Almighty God. This is what we believe and these are the values that will guide us as we strive to build an even better and greater future. Those who seek to erase our heritage want Americans to forget our pride and our great dignity so that we can no longer understand ourselves or America's destiny. In toppling the heroes of 1776, they seek to dissolve the bonds of love and loyalty that we feel for our country and that we feel for each other. Their goal is not a better America, their goal is to end America. In its place, they want power for themselves, but just as patriots did in centuries past, the American people will stand in their way and we will win and win quickly and with great dignity. We will never let them rip America's heroes from our monuments or from our hearts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5177, "text": "By tearing down Washington and Jefferson, these radicals would tear down the very heritage for which men gave their lives to win the Civil War, they would erase the memory that inspired those soldiers to go to their deaths, singing these words of the Battle Hymn of the Republic, As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free, while God is marching on. They would tear down the principles that propelled the abolition of slavery and ultimately around the world ending an evil institution that had plagued humanity for thousands and thousands of years. Our opponents would tear apart the very documents that Martin Luther King used to express his dream and the ideas that were the foundation of the righteous movement for Civil Rights. They would tear down the beliefs, culture and identity, that have made America the most vibrant and tolerant society in the history of the earth. My fellow Americans, it is time to speak up loudly and strongly and powerfully and defend the integrity of our country. It is time for our politicians to summon the bravery and determination of our American ancestors. It is time to plant our flag and to protect the greatest of this nation for citizens of every race in every city in every part of this glorious land. For the sake of our honor, for the sake of our children, for the sake of our union, we must protect and preserve our history, our heritage, and our great heroes. Here tonight before the eyes of our forefathers, Americans declare again, as we did 244 years ago, that we will not be tyrannized, we will not be demeaned, and we will not be intimidated by bad, evil people. We will proclaim the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and we will never surrender the spirit and the courage and the cause of July 4, 1776. Upon this ground, we will stand firm and unwavering. In the face of lies meant to divide us, demoralize us and diminish us, we will show that the story of America unites us and - We will show that the story of America unites us, inspires us, includes us all, and makes everyone free. We must demand that our children are taught once again to see America as did Reverend Martin Luther King when he said that the founders had signed a promissory note to every future generation. King saw that the mission of justice required us to fully embrace our founding ideals. Those ideals are so important to us, the founding ideals.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5178, "text": "He called on his fellow citizens not to rip down their heritage, but to live up to their heritage. Above all, our children from every community must be taught that to be American is to inherit the spirit of the most adventurous and confident people ever to walk the face of the Earth. Americans are the people who pursued our Manifest Destiny across the ocean, into the uncharted wilderness, over the tallest mountains, and then into the skies, and even into the stars. We are the country of Andrew Jackson, Ulysses S. Grant, and Frederick Douglas. We are the land of Wild Bill Hickock and Buffalo Bill Cody. We are the nation that gave rise to the Wright brothers, the Tuskegee airmen, Harriet Tubman, Clara Barton, Jesse Owens, George Patton, General George Patton, the great Louis Armstrong, Alan Shepard, Elvis Presley, and Muhammad Ali, and only America could have produced them all. We are the culture that put up the Hoover Dam, laid down the highways, and sculpted the skyline of Manhattan. We are the people who dreamed the spectacular dream, it was called Las Vegas in the Nevada desert, who built up Miami from the Florida marsh, and who carved our heroes into the face of Mount Rushmore. Americans harnessed electricity, split the atom, and gave the world the telephone and the internet. We settled the Wild West, won two World Wars, landed American astronauts on the moon. And one day very soon, we will plant our flag on Mars. We gave the world the poetry of Walt Whitman, the stories of Mark Twain, the songs of Irving Berlin, the voice of Ella Fitzgerald, the style of Frank Sinatra, the comedy of Bob Hope, the power of the Saturn V rocket, the toughness of the Ford F150, and the awesome might of the American aircraft carriers. Americans must never lose sight of this miraculous story. We should never lose sight of it. Nobody has ever done it like we have done it. So today, under the authority vested in me as President of the United States, I am announcing the creation of a new monument to the giants of our past. I am signing an executive order to establish the National Guard of American heroes, a vast outdoor park that will feature the statues of the greatest Americans to ever live. From this night, and from this magnificent place, let us go forward united in our purpose and rededicated in our resolve. We will raise the next generation of American patriots. We will write the next thrilling chapter of the American adventure.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechtranscriptatmountrushmore4thofjulyevent", "title": "Donald Trump Mount Rushmore Speech Transcript at 4th of July Event", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-transcript-at-mount-rushmore-4th-of-july-event", "publication_date": "03-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5195, "text": "We have got some business to do today. I love you back. Before we get started I want to just acknowledge some outstanding public servants who are here. First of all, somebody who I believe is one of the finest governors in this country -- Ted Strickland is here. The lieutenant-governor and soon-to-be junior senator from the great state of Illinois -- or Ohio -- I was thinking about my own home -- Lee Fisher is here. I used to hear that line all the time about senator from Illinois -- that would be me. Outstanding mayor of Cleveland, Frank Jackson is here. The mayor of Parma, Dean DePiero. Somebody who is fighting for working families each and every day, Senator Sherrod Brown is here. It is good to be back in Ohio. You know, in the fall of 2008, one of the last rallies of my presidential campaign was right here in the Cleveland area. It was a hopeful time, just two days before the election. And we knew that if we pulled it off, we'd finally have the chance to tackle some big and difficult challenges that had been facing this country for a very long time. We also hoped for a chance to get beyond some of the old political divides -- between Democrats and Republicans, red states and blue states -- that had prevented us from making progress. Because although we are proud to be Democrats, we are prouder to be Americans ---- and we believed then and we believe now that no single party has a monopoly on wisdom. That is not to say that the election did not expose deep differences between the parties. Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut trade deals even if they did not benefit our workers. The idea was that if we just had blind faith in the market, if we let corporations play by their own rules, if we left everyone else to fend for themselves that America would grow and America would prosper. And for a time this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better TVs. Nobody understands that more than the people of Ohio. Job growth between 2000 and 2008 was slower than it had been in any economic expansion since World War II -- slower than it is been over the last year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5196, "text": "The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept on going up. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many could not afford to buy in the first place. And meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit. I ran for President because I believed that this kind of economy was unsustainable -- for the middle class and for the future of our nation. I ran because I had a different idea about how America was built. It was an idea rooted in my own family's story. You see, Michelle and I are where we are today because even though our families did not have much, they worked tirelessly -- without complaint -- so that we might have a better life. My grandfather marched off to Europe in World War II, while my grandmother worked in factories on the home front. I had a single mom who put herself through school, and would wake before dawn to make sure I got a decent education. Michelle can still remember her father heading out to his job as a city worker long after multiple sclerosis had made it impossible for him to walk without crutches. He always got to work; he just had to get up a little earlier. Yes, our families believed in the American values of self-reliance and individual responsibility, and they instilled those values in their children. But they also believed in a country that rewards responsibility; a country that rewards hard work; a country built on the promise of opportunity and upward mobility. They believed in an America that gave my grandfather the chance to go to college because of the GI Bill; an America that gave my grandparents the chance to buy a home because of the Federal Housing Authority; an America that gave their children and grandchildren the chance to fulfill our dreams thanks to college loans and college scholarships. It was an America where you did not buy things you could not afford; where we did not just think about today -- we thought about tomorrow. An America that took pride in the goods that we made, not just the things we consumed. An America where a rising tide really did lift all boats, from the company CEO to the guy on the assembly line. That is what led me to work in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant on the South Side of Chicago when I was a community organizer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5197, "text": "It is what led me to fight for factory workers at manufacturing plants that were closing across Illinois when I was a senator. It is what led me to run for President -- because I do not believe we can have a strong and growing economy without a strong and growing middle class. Now, much has happened since that election. The flawed policies and economic weaknesses of the previous decade culminated in a financial crisis and the worst recession of our lifetimes. And my hope was that the crisis would cause everybody, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. Some Republican leaders figured it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess. Others believed on principle that government should not meddle in the markets, even when the markets are broken. But with the nation losing nearly 800,000 jobs the month that I was sworn into office, my most urgent task was to stop a financial meltdown and prevent this recession from becoming a second depression. And, Ohio, we have done that. The private sector has created jobs for the last eight months in a row. And there are roughly 3 million Americans who are working today because of the economic plan we put into place. Millions of jobs were lost before our policies even had a chance to take effect. We lost 4 million in the six months before I took office. It was a hole so deep that even though we have added jobs again, millions of Americans remain unemployed. Hundreds of thousands of families have lost their homes. Millions more can barely pay the bills or make the mortgage. The middle class is still treading water, and those aspiring to reach the middle class are doing everything they can to keep from drowning. And meanwhile, some of the very steps that were necessary to save the economy -- like temporarily supporting the banks and the auto industry -- fed the perception that Washington is still ignoring the middle class in favor of special interests. And so people are frustrated and they are angry and they are anxious about the future. I understand that. I also understand that in a political campaign, the easiest thing for the other side to do is to ride this fear and anger all the way to Election Day. A few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House came here to Cleveland and offered his party's answer to our economic challenges.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5198, "text": "Now, it would be one thing if he had admitted his party's mistakes during the eight years that they were in power, if they had gone off for a while and meditated, and come back and offered a credible new approach to solving our country's problems. Cut more taxes for millionaires and cut more rules for corporations. Instead of coming together like past generations did to build a better country for our children and grandchildren, their argument is that we should let insurance companies go back to denying care for folks who are sick, or let credit card companies go back to raising rates without any reason. Instead of setting our sights higher, they are asking us to settle for a status quo of stagnant growth and eroding competitiveness and a shrinking middle class. A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what has not is the choice facing this country. It is still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. That is what this election is about. That is the choice you will face in November. Now, we have a different vision for the future. See, I have never believed that government has all the answers to our problems. I have never believed that government's role is to create jobs or prosperity. I believe it is the drive and the ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, our small businesses; the skill and dedication of our workers ---- that is made us the wealthiest nation on Earth. I believe it is the private sector that must be the main engine for our recovery. I believe government should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices do not hurt others. But in the words of the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, I also believe that government should do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves. investments in education and clean energy, in basic research and technology and infrastructure. That means making sure corporations live up to their responsibilities to treat consumers fairly and play by the same rules as everyone else. Their responsibility is to look out for their workers, as well as their shareholders, and create jobs here at home. And that means providing a hand-up for middle-class families -- so that if they work hard and meet their responsibilities, they can afford to raise their children, and send them to college, see a doctor when they get sick, retire with dignity and respect.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5199, "text": "That is what we Democrats believe in -- a vibrant free market, but one that works for everybody. That is our vision for a stronger economy and a growing middle class. And that is the difference between what we and Republicans in Congress are offering the American people right now. Let me give you a few specific examples of our different approaches. This week, I proposed some additional steps to grow the economy and help businesses spur hiring. One of the keys to job creation is to encourage companies to invest more in the United States. But for years, our tax code has actually given billions of dollars in tax breaks that encourage companies to create jobs and profits in other countries. I want to change that. I want to change that. Instead of tax loopholes that incentivize investment in overseas jobs, I am proposing a more generous, permanent extension of the tax credit that goes to companies for all the research and innovation they do right here in Ohio, right here in the United States of America. And I am proposing that all American businesses should be allowed to write off all the investment they do in 2011. And this will help small businesses upgrade their plants and equipment, and will encourage large corporations to get off the sidelines and start putting their profits to work in places like Cleveland and Toledo and Dayton. Now, to most of you, I will bet this just seems like common sense. For years, Republicans have fought to keep these corporate loopholes open. In fact, when Mr. Boehner was here in Cleveland he attacked us for closing a few of these loopholes -- and using the money to help states like Ohio keep hundreds of thousands of teachers and cops and firefighters on the job. Boehner dismissed these jobs we saved -- teaching our kids, patrolling our streets, rushing into burning buildings -- as government jobs -- jobs I guess he thought just were not worth saving. I think teachers and police officers and firefighters are part of what keeps America strong. And, Ohio, I think if we are going to give tax breaks to companies, they should go to companies that create jobs in America -- not that create jobs overseas. That is one difference between the Republican vision and the Democratic vision. That is what this election is all about. Let me give you another example. We want to put more Americans back to work rebuilding America -- our roads, our railways, our runways. When the housing sector collapsed and the recession hit, one in every four jobs lost were in the construction industry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5200, "text": "That is partly why our economic plan has invested in badly needed infrastructure projects over the last 19 months -- not just roads and bridges, but high-speed railroads and expanded broadband access. Altogether, these projects have led to thousands of good, private sector jobs, especially for those in the trades. Boehner and the Republicans in Congress said no to these projects. Though I should say it did not stop a lot of them from showing up at the ribbon-cuttings ---- trying to take credit. And engineers, economists, governors, mayors of every political stripe believe that if we want to compete in this global economy, we need to rebuild this vital infrastructure. There is no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains or the most modern airports -- we want to put people to work building them right here in America. So this week, I have proposed a six-year infrastructure plan that would start putting Americans to work right away. But despite the fact that this has traditionally been an issue with bipartisan support, Mr. Boehner has so far said no to infrastructure. That is bad for America -- and that, too, is what this election is all about. I will give you one final example of the differences between us and the Republicans, and that is on the issue of tax cuts. Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year -- for everybody. By the way, this was by design. When they passed these tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, they did not want everybody to know what it would do to our deficit, so they pretended like they were going to end, even though now they say they do not . Now, I believe we ought to make the tax cuts for the middle class permanent. These families are the ones who saw their wages and incomes flat-line over the last decade -- you deserve a break. You deserve some help. And because folks in the middle class are more likely to spend their tax cut on basic necessities, that strengthens the economy as a whole. But the Republican leader of the House does not want to stop there. He and his party believe we should also give a permanent tax cut to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5201, "text": "With all the other budgetary pressures we have -- with all the Republicans' talk about wanting to shrink the deficit -- they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next 10 years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 each to folks who are already millionaires. And keep in mind wealthy Americans are just about the only folks who saw their incomes rise when Republicans were in charge. And these are the folks who are less likely to spend the money -- which is why economists do not think tax breaks for the wealthy would do much to boost the economy. We should not hold middle-class tax cuts hostage any longer. We are ready, this week, if they want, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less. That is 98-97 percent of Americans. Now, for any income over this amount, the tax rates would just go back to what they were under President Clinton. This is not to punish folks who are better off -- God bless them. It is because we cannot afford the $700 billion price tag. And for those who claim that our approach would somehow be bad for growth and bad for small businesses, let me remind you that with those tax rates in place, under President Clinton, this country created 22 million jobs and raised incomes and had the largest surplus in our history. In fact, if the Republican leadership in Congress really wants to help small businesses, they will stop using legislative maneuvers to block an up or down vote on a small business jobs bill that is before the Senate right now. This is a bill that would do two things. It would cut taxes for small businesses and make loans more available for small businesses. It is fully paid for, will not add to the deficit. And it was written by Democrats and Republicans. And yet, the other party continues to block this jobs bill -- a delay that small business owners have said is actually leading them to put off hiring. Look, I recognize that most of the Republicans in Congress have said no to just about every policy I have proposed since taking office. I realize in some cases that there are genuine philosophical differences. But on issues like this one -- a tax cut for small businesses supported by the Chamber of Commerce -- the only reason they are holding this up is politics, pure and simple. If I fail, they win.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5202, "text": "Well, they might think that this will get them to where they want to go in November, but it will not get our country going where it needs to go in the long run. It will not get us there. It will not get us there. It will not get us there. Do we return to the same failed policies that ran our economy into a ditch, or do we keep moving forward with policies that are slowly pulling us out? Do we settle for a slow decline, or do we reach for an America with a growing economy and a thriving middle class? That is the America that I see. We see a future where we invest in American innovation and American ingenuity; where we export more goods so we create more jobs here at home; where we make it easier to start a business or patent an invention; where we build a homegrown, clean energy industry -- because I do not want to see new solar panels or electric cars or advanced batteries manufactured in Europe or Asia. I want to see them made right here in the U.S. of A by American workers. We see an America where every citizen has the skills and training to compete with any worker in the world. That is why we have set a goal to once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. That is why we are revitalizing community colleges like this one. That is why we are reforming our education system based on what works for our children, not what perpetuates the status quo. We see an America where a growing middle class is the beating heart of a growing economy. That is why I kept my campaign promise and gave a middle-class tax cut to 95 percent of working Americans. That is why we passed health insurance reform that stops insurance companies from jacking up your premiums at will or denying coverage because you get sick. That is why we passed financial reform that will end taxpayer-funded bailouts; reform that will stop credit card companies and mortgage lenders from taking advantage of taxpayers and consumers. That is why we are trying to make it easier for workers to save for retirement and fighting the efforts of some in the other party to privatize Social Security -- because as long as I am President, no one is going to take the retirement savings of a generation of Americans and hand it over to Wall Street.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5203, "text": "That is why we are fighting to extend the child tax credit and make permanent our new college tax credit, because if we do, it will mean $10,000 in tuition relief for each child going to four years of college. And I do not want any parent not to be sending their kids, in good time or bad, to college because they cannot afford it. And finally, we see an America where we refuse to pass on the debt we inherited to the next generation. Now, let me spend just a minute on this issue, because we have heard a lot of moralizing on the other side about this -- government spending and debt. Along with the tax cuts for the wealthy, the other party's main economic proposal is that they will stop government spending. Now, it is right to be concerned about the long-term deficit. If we do not get a handle on it soon, it can endanger our future. And at a time when folks are tightening their belts at home, I understand why a lot of Americans feel it is time for government to show some discipline, too. But let us look at the facts. When these same Republicans -- including Mr. Boehner -- were in charge, the number of earmarks and pet projects went up, not down. These same Republicans turned a record surplus into a record deficit. When I walked in, wrapped in a nice bow was a $1.3 trillion deficit sitting right there on my doorstep. Just this year, these same Republicans voted against a bipartisan fiscal commission that they themselves had proposed. Once I decided I was for it, they were against it. And when you ask them what programs they'd actually cut they do not have an answer. Now, I will be honest -- I refuse to cut back on those investments that will grow our economy in the future -- investments in areas like education and clean energy and technology. I do not want to cut those things. And that is because economic growth is the single best way to bring down the deficit -- and we need these investments to grow. But I am absolutely committed to fiscal responsibility, which is why I have already proposed freezing all discretionary spending unrelated to national security for the next three years. And once the bipartisan fiscal commission finishes its work, I will spend the next year making the tough choices necessary to further reduce our deficit and lower our debt -- whether I get help from the other side or not.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5204, "text": "Not everything we have done over the last two years has worked as quickly as we had hoped, and I am keenly aware that not all of our policies have been popular. But you did not elect me to do what was easy. You did not elect me to just read the polls and figure how to keep myself in office. You did not elect me to avoid big problems. You elected me to do what was right. And as long as I am President, that is exactly what I intend to do. This country is emerging from an incredibly difficult period in its history -- an era of irresponsibility that stretched from Wall Street to Washington, and had a devastating effect on a lot of people. We have started turning the corner on that era. hard work and self-reliance; responsibility for ourselves, but also responsibility for one another. It is about moving from an attitude that said What is in it for me? to one that asks, What is best for America? What is best for all our workers? What is best for all of our businesses? What is best for all of our children? Social Security and the minimum wage; the GI Bill and Medicare; civil rights and worker's rights and women's rights. But we also recognize that throughout our history, there has been a noble Republican vision as well, of what this country can be. It was the vision of Abraham Lincoln, who set up the first land grant colleges and launched the transcontinental railroad; the vision of Teddy Roosevelt, who used the power of government to break up monopolies; the vision of Dwight Eisenhower, who helped build the Interstate Highway System. And, yes, the vision of Ronald Reagan, who despite his aversion to government, was willing to help save Social Security for future generations -- working with Democrats. These were serious leaders for serious times. They were great politicians, but they did not spend all their time playing games or scoring points. They did not always prey on people's fears and anxieties. They made mistakes, but they did what they thought was in the best interests of their country and its people. And that is what the American people expect of us today -- Democrats, independents, and Republicans. That is the leadership we owe them. I know that folks are worried about the future. I know there is still a lot of hurt out here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "clevelandcomopen201009transcriptofpresidentobamas1html", "title": "Transcript of President Obama's speech at Cuyahoga Community College", "source": "https://www.cleveland.com/open/2010/09/transcript_of_president_obamas_1.html", "publication_date": "", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5206, "text": "Well, it is wonderful to see all of you here today. Tomorrow is one of the best days of the year to be an American. It is a day to count our blessings, spend time with the ones we love, and enjoy some good food and some great company. But it is also one of the worst days of the year to be a turkey. The rare exception, of course, are the two birds who've joined me today. Some of you may know that recently I have been taking a series of executive actions that do not require congressional approval. We cannot wait to pardon these turkeys. Otherwise they'd end up next to the mashed potatoes and stuffing. I want to thank Richard Huisinga, the chairman of the National Turkey Federation, and his wonderful family for donating this year's turkey from his farm in Willmar, Minnesota. The turkey's name is Liberty--there he is--and along with his understudy named Peace, he has the distinction of being the luckiest bird on the face of the Earth. Right now he is also probably one of the most confused. Liberty was chosen from a flock of about 30 other contestants for the honor of being here today. And for the first time in history, these two turkeys were raised by four students from nearby Willmar High School. Now, I am told that in order to prepare Liberty and Peace for their big day, the students exposed them to loud noises and flashbulbs so that they'd be ready to face the White House press corps. They also received the most important part of their media training, which involves learning how to gobble without really saying anything. So Liberty is ready for his turn in the spotlight. And after he finishes a round of cable hits and a few Sunday shows, he is going to retire to a life of leisure at Mount Vernon, the same place where George Washington spent his golden years. And later today Michelle, Malia, Sasha, and I will also be taking two unnamed turkeys, who were not so lucky, to a local food bank here in DC that helps those in need. And I want to thank the folks at Jaindl's Turkey Farm in Orefield, Pennsylvania, for donating these dressed birds for the third year in a row. A great writer once called Thanksgiving the one day that is ours . . . the one day that is purely American.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthethanksgivingturkeypresentationceremony10", "title": "Remarks at the Thanksgiving Turkey Presentation Ceremony", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-thanksgiving-turkey-presentation-ceremony-10", "publication_date": "23-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5207, "text": "I am proud of you. I am proud of your dedication. It is a great country where Windy can come from a Head Start program and is now a leader in the movement to make sure Head Start fulfills the promise of the program. First, I want to thank the good folks here at Highland Park Elementary School for letting me come by and see a program which works. I do not know if the people in the State of Maryland know this-I know the Governor does-that the teachers here and the program here uses a strategy, what they call a Center for Improving Readiness for Children, Learning, and Education, C.I.R.C.L.E., which is a model program. It is a program that incorporates profound and simple reading lessons necessary to lay the foundation for future readers. So, I have really come to say a couple of things. One, I want to thank the good folks at this learning institution for your focus and dedication. I also want to say that this is possible, this program is possible, to be spread around the country. I mean, this is what we need to do. That is what we are here to talk about. I will never forget the lady in Houston, Texas, who stood up at one time and she said, Reading is the new civil right. Her point was, is that if you cannot read, it is hard to access the greatness of America. And if reading is the new civil right, a good place to start with civil rights is at the Head Start programs all across the country. And that is what we are here to talk about, how to make then work better. We want better than okay in America. We want excellence. Windy understands that, and I want to thank her for working with my Secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson. And I appreciate my friend Rod Paige. He is the Secretary of Education. The idea is to combine both focuses, both Departments into one when it comes to Head Start. The Head Start program will stay under Tommy's purview, but we want it to become an Education Department as well. I mean, after all, you have got a million kids gathered together at one time during the day. If you have got a million kids that may be, as they call them in the education world, at-risk readers, let us get it right early then. That is what we are saying. And that is what this initiative is attempting to do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshighlandparkelementaryschoollandovermaryland", "title": "Remarks at Highland Park Elementary School in Landover, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-highland-park-elementary-school-landover-maryland", "publication_date": "07-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5208, "text": "I appreciate Bob Ehrlich, the Governor of this great State. He knows what he is doing when it comes to education. He is got a great wife, the first lady, Kendel, with us as well. Governor Ehrlich sets high standards. He challenges what I call the soft bigotry of low expectations. He understands if you lower the bar, assign certain kids to failure based upon demographics, that is precisely what you will get in the State of Maryland. So he said, We ought to raise the bar. They understand that high standards will yield high results. And the best place to start in achieving high standards is with the littlest of children. I want to thank very much Congressman John Boehner for coming today. The Congressman is not from Maryland; he is from Ohio. But he is an important figure since he is the chairman of the House Education Committee which is marking up legislation which will help us spread excellence to the Head Start programs all across the country. I look forward to continuing to work with him. He also is one of the authors of what we call the No Child Left Behind Act, which I will talk about a little bit later. But the No Child Left Behind Act essentially says we expect every child to learn, and there is going to be high standards and strong accountability measures to every State in the Union. In return for increased Title I funding and in return for an increase in the Federal budget of elementary and secondary schools act money, we expect results. You see, we are not going to just spend money and hope something positive happens. We are going to spend money and see results. Well, if you believe in high standards and accountability, then it is really important to get the young kids up to the starting line at the same time. And that is why the Head Start reforms we are going to talk about are important, the reforms which John and his committee are carrying to the floor of the House relatively soon. I want to thank Nancy Grasmick, who is the State superintendent of schools in Maryland. I appreciate Andre Hornsby as the superintendent of schools, an even tougher job. Government closest to the people is sometimes government that is the hardest. And I want to thank Guylaine Richard, who is the program director for the Head Start. I appreciate, Guylaine, you opening up this chance for me to come and see a program which works. I want to thank Lori Ellis, the principal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshighlandparkelementaryschoollandovermaryland", "title": "Remarks at Highland Park Elementary School in Landover, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-highland-park-elementary-school-landover-maryland", "publication_date": "07-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5209, "text": "When we leave, she can take a deep breath and relax and say, Thank goodness the entourage has departed. I appreciate the-Tonya Riggins, who is the Highland Park Head Start Center coordinator. I want to thank Lisa Dunmore and Alice Williams, the two fine teachers we had to meet. For the teachers who are here, thank you for doing what you are doing. You are a part of a noble profession, an incredibly important profession for the future of this country. You know what I know, that reading is the key to all learning. And the research-I see some of my friends from the National Research Council, National Institutions of Child Health who are here. He understands how the brain works, and he is spent a lot of time analyzing what works and what does not work. He caught my attention when I was the Governor of Texas. I would ask him a question, Are you sure we can teach kids, you know, the so-called impossible-to-teach? He said, Sure, I know it. And so he started doing research to convince the people about the real future. And he says that-he and his fellow researchers-that preschoolers can learn much more than we ever thought possible about words and sounds. In other words, society limited how much a certain-how much a preschooler could learn. It kind of felt like certain things were impossible to-certain knowledge was impossible to impart to our children, particularly the young. And so I want to thank Reid and the good folks who are focusing on science, who have opened up a tremendous realm of possibility now to achieve that which we want, a literate America. Even the youngest child can learn that we read words and letters from left to right or that letters are associated with sounds; even the youngest of toddlers can figure that out over time. In one exercise, children clapped for each syllable in a word. They can trace letters on the page to begin to understand the movements we use to write. They can play word games and learn rhymes and songs that help them to develop their own vocabulary. That sounds like a simple curriculum, but it is research-based, all aimed at laying the foundation for children to become good readers. These are what we call the building blocks, and these building blocks need to be a part of Head Start programs all across America. Research also shows that if children do not develop these skills before they reach kindergarten, they will struggle to achieve success in their lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshighlandparkelementaryschoollandovermaryland", "title": "Remarks at Highland Park Elementary School in Landover, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-highland-park-elementary-school-landover-maryland", "publication_date": "07-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5210, "text": "Now, we need to listen to that kind of research in America. If the scientists come together and say, If we fail in our mission to give children the foundation necessary for reading, they will fall behind and may not be able to develop the skills necessary, so they have to struggle in life, we got a-this is an opportunity that we better not miss. We cannot let our children down. Now look, Head Start is a great opportunity to provide the foundation for reading. And first, I just want everybody to understand, Head Start does a good job of giving children nutrition and medical care. That has been primarily the focus, and the program needs to be applauded for meeting that goal. And nobody in this room wants Head Start to change that focus. We just want an additional focus to Head Start, and the Head Start focus is teaching the basics for reading and math. That is the new focus, along with health and nutrition. Even though most children in Head Start make some educational progress, most of them still leave the program with skills and knowledge levels that are far below what we expect. Now, in my line of work, if you see a problem, you address it. And I see that as a problem. If we are not meeting expectations, if we are not challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations, let us start right now in America. We want Head Start to set higher ambitions for the million children it serves. And so I laid out a plan. Every Head Start center must prepare children to succeed by teaching the basics of learning and literacy. That is the cornerstone of the plan. And every Head Start teacher must have the skills necessary to do so. And so we started last year when we launched the Strategic Teacher Education Program, STEP, to train 3,300 Head Start teachers and supervisors in the C.I.R.C.L.E. program, which is used right here at this school. In other words, it is a go-by. It is not a difficult chore for a teacher to take the basic learning from the C.I.R.C.L.E. program developed by the scientists and implement it at the Head Start program in which he or she teaches. Tonya Riggins, the assistant Head Start supervisor at Highland Park, was one of the teachers in the program. Tonya and thousands of other trained teachers went back to train other teachers at the program. So it is going to-we started with 3,300.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshighlandparkelementaryschoollandovermaryland", "title": "Remarks at Highland Park Elementary School in Landover, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-highland-park-elementary-school-landover-maryland", "publication_date": "07-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5211, "text": "Those 3,300 went back to their local communities and talked to teachers with whom they teach how to teach a basic curriculum. It is a-and by the way, as new teachers are added, they too will be given the tools necessary to teach the program. Now, in order to make sure that the C.I.R.C.L.E. program is-and other curriculums which work-are being used, is working, I believe there needs to be an evaluation program. And after all, if we are spending a lot of taxpayers' money, which we are, it makes sense to determine whether or not these programs are, in fact, laying the foundation for reading. Now, I fully understand a 4-year-old child is not going to take a standardized test. That we would-we would be defeating the purpose of accountability before we even began if we said, Okay, we will give standardized tests to 4-year-olds. But we can have children assessed by asking simple questions. You know, words go left to right. Are you able to identify certain sounds? Are they developed by-developing the key skills necessary? And I think what needs to happen is- and I hope Congress agrees-that the simple evaluations at the beginning of the year and the end of the year will tell us whether or not progress is being made in developing a curriculum necessary to teach children how to read. And if they are, we ought to be praising the programs, and if they are not, something else ought to happen. We cannot miss the opportunity much longer in America. And so Boehner is here because his committee and the Congress is considering legislation that would put a new emphasis on language skills and literacy skills in Head Start programs. In other words, we are going to codify into law that which we have started through the teacher training program. The legislation will require Head Start providers to teach language, reading, and writing skills, as well as early math skills. In other words, it now becomes a part- when they pass the law that says the Head Start mission is further defined as an educational mission. And those programs that are used must be proven by scientific research. We are going to have high standards. We are going to trust the local people to develop the curriculum, but in return for Federal money, we want you to measure to tell us whether or not children are learning to read and write.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshighlandparkelementaryschoollandovermaryland", "title": "Remarks at Highland Park Elementary School in Landover, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-highland-park-elementary-school-landover-maryland", "publication_date": "07-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5212, "text": "And that is a heavy lift for some communities, because there has not been a proper focus on the little children. And therefore, we are asking people to develop an accountability system without everybody being at the same starting position. And that is why it is so important for preschool programs to be focused on literacy, so that when the accountability systems kick in in Maryland or Texas or anybody else, we can truthfully say that every child has been given the tools necessary to be at the starting line at the same time, so that we have true accountability, true measurement. Now, there is Governors around the State, the country that have said, Look, give us the flexibility to be able to dovetail the Head Start program into our preschool programs so that all students-so we have a better control over whether or not the students are given the skills necessary so that when you hold us to account, we can achieve that which we want to achieve, which is excellence in the classroom. I appreciate the desire for flexibility. I support the Governors' desire for flexibility so long as, one, Federal monies going to the States are used only for Head Start. In other words, what we really do not want to do is say we are going to focus on Head Start; the Head Start money goes for, you know, a prison complex. I know that will not happen with Governor Ehrlich, but there needs to be a guarantee that the Federal money spent on Head Start only go to Head Start. Secondly, States and local governments must put money into the program, which would lock in the Head Start money for Head Start. So, in other words, the flexibility given to the State would not allow the States budget flexibility. It is management flexibility to be able to take the Head Start program, dovetail into the preschool program, then the kindergarten program, and then into the elementary school program. Governors ought to have that flexibility to-hope that Congress will provide that flexibility so that when the accountability systems kick in, fully kick in, that a Governor can truthfully say, Well, I have had the tools necessary to make sure the Head Start program fits into an overall comprehensive plan for literacy and math for every child in the State of Maryland, in Governor Ehrlich's case. It is-it seems like to me a fantastic opportunity for the country to make sure that the desires of this country are met, and that is, every child become a good reader.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshighlandparkelementaryschoollandovermaryland", "title": "Remarks at Highland Park Elementary School in Landover, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-highland-park-elementary-school-landover-maryland", "publication_date": "07-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5213, "text": "Congresswoman Holt asked me how I knew all the names. I know a lot more about you all than you think I do. This morning I will be signing a proclamation to implement the terms of the registration act that the Congress recently passed. I would like to say at the beginning that this is a very wise decision that the Congress has made. And I would like to emphasize that the registration act-which has now been passed and will go into effect-is not to threaten war, but is to preserve peace. The action taken by our country and almost all other nations in the democratic world is designed to preserve peace. We are deeply concerned about the unwarranted and vicious invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union and occupation by them of this innocent and defenseless country, which is completely unwarranted. We have taken a series of steps-economic, diplomatic, political, military steps-in order to convince the Soviet Union that their action is ill advised and, of course, encouraging them to withdraw their troops from Afghanistan and also to prevent further aggression if they should be tempted to do so. All of the action we have taken is peaceful in nature, and we will stay committed to a peaceful resolution of disputes. The freedom-fighters in Afghanistan, who are striving for the liberation of their country, deserve the admiration of the entire world, and their courage and persistence in fighting for freedom is the greatest single deterrent to the Soviet aggression being successful. I would like to emphasize that the registration act is not a draft; I am not in favor of a peacetime draft. This registration act will do a great deal to marshal our own Nation's resistance to succumbing to temptation which might lead to war, and therefore lead to a mandatory draft. The only time that I envision a mandatory draft law being advocated to the Congress would be in time of war or in time of national emergency, and in a case of that kind, when our Nation's security is threatened, separate legal action would be required by Congress, a separate law, to initiate a draft under those circumstances. I might say that we will continue to rely on voluntary enlistment by the military forces to defend our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningproclamation4771registrationunderthemilitaryselectiveserviceact", "title": "Remarks on Signing Proclamation 4771 on Registration Under the Military Selective Service Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-proclamation-4771-registration-under-the-military-selective-service-act", "publication_date": "02-07-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5214, "text": "In those awful moments after the South Tower was hit, some of the injured huddled in the wreckage of the 78th floor. The air was filled with smoke. clear, calm, saying he had found the stairs. A young man in his twenties, strong, emerged from the smoke, and over his nose and his mouth, he wore a red handkerchief. He called for fire extinguishers to fight back the flames. He tended to the wounded. He led those survivors down the stairs to safety and carried a woman on his shoulders down 17 flights. And then, he went back, back up all those flights, then back down again, bringing more wounded to safety. Until that moment when the tower fell. They did not know his name. They did not know where he came from. But they knew their lives had been saved by the man in the red bandana. On behalf of Michelle and myself and the American people, it is an honor for us to join in your memories. Michelle and I just had the opportunity to join with others on a visit with some of the survivors and families, men and women who inspire us all. And we had a chance to visit some of the exhibits. for bringing us to this day, for giving us this sacred place of healing and of hope. Here, at this memorial, this museum, we come together. We stand in the footprints of two mighty towers, graced by the rush of eternal waters. We look into the faces of nearly 3,000 innocent souls, men and women and children of every race, every creed, from every corner of the world. a wedding ring, a dusty helmet, a shining badge. of coworkers who led others to safety; passengers who stormed a cockpit; our men and women in uniform who rushed into an inferno; our first responders who charged up those stairs; a generation of servicemembers our 9/11 generation who have served with honor in more than a decade of war. A nation that stands tall and united and unafraid, because no act of terror can match the strength or the character of our country. Like the great wall and bedrock that embrace us today, nothing can ever break us; nothing can change who we are as Americans. On that September morning, Alison Crowther lost her son Welles. Months later, she was reading the newspaper, an article about those final minutes in the towers. Survivors recounted how a young man wearing a red handkerchief had led them to safety. And in that moment, Alison knew.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalseptember11memorialmuseumdedicationceremonynewyorkcity", "title": "Remarks at the National September 11 Memorial & Museum Dedication Ceremony in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-september-11-memorial-museum-dedication-ceremony-new-york-city", "publication_date": "15-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5218, "text": "Let me just explain what Michael was talking about. There has been this hurricane down in Florida, and so we leave right from here to go down to Newark, take the plane, and head on down to look at that damage and express our concerns to the people there. A warm reception coming into town. I want to thank David Rifkin and especially the Mayor Thomas Hallihan. Let me also mention an old friend and a good man, Gary Franks, who is the Congressman here. I am so indebted to him. And another that you all know so well in this valley, John Rowland, he is a great man, and I want to see him do more. I was touched by the Reverend Father Weiss' invocation. And I want to ask today that we now take a little political look ahead to the fall. I will tell you something. I came out of that Houston convention, and the whole spirit around this country is different. I am determined to win this election, and I am determined to do it fair and square. If I had not been fired up when I walked in here, the Company, that great music, would have got it going, I will tell you. But anyway, we are looking ahead to a great classic that takes place this fall. I am not talking about Ansonia versus Derby -- -- I am talking about the November 3d contest. That does have a lot to do with the direction of this country and also the new century beyond. I heard my grandson speak at our convention, and I was so very proud of that young kid. It just reminded me on a very personal basis of what the Reverend Father was talking about and the job that lies ahead of us, to make life better for all. Now, we have witnessed, as I pointed out down there, a world of change from Managua to Moscow. Millions of men and women now turn towards freedom. They are celebrating a new birth of freedom. I believe people right here in the valley, many of whom came here from other countries, many of whose family came here, understand what I am talking about when I say this Nation can take pride in the freedom of others. Many right in this room, because of family, not just because of freedom and democracy, because of family, prayed for this day of freedom to come to Eastern Europe, to Russia, to the countries south of our border. We have witnessed this remarkable change, and this miracle has come true.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthechambercommerceansoniaconnecticut", "title": "Remarks to the Chamber of Commerce in Ansonia, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-chamber-commerce-ansonia-connecticut", "publication_date": "24-08-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5219, "text": "So now the challenge for this country is to bring that spirit home from Warsaw, Poland, to Warsaw Park and to focus this great Nation on the mission ahead. We have literally changed the world with the help of the taxpayer, Presidents that preceded me, fighting men and women that have served this great country with distinction. We have changed the world, and now we must change America for the better. Our challenge quite simply is to win the global economic challenge, to win the peace, be a military superpower, an economic superpower, an export superpower. In this election you are going to hear two very different visions of how to do this. Theirs is to turn inward and protect; and ours is to look outward and open new markets and prepare our people to compete, to restore social fabric, to save and invest. When I am talking about investment, I do not mean more taxpayer money going into Government investment. I mean more private investment, small business investment. I do not want to get too personal in this wonderful area that I understand has some wonderfully smart Democrats, because I need you guys in the fall. But let me say this, that my opponent has spent most of his adult life in government, and that is pretty much, I think, all he knows about. But his idea about creating jobs is to have Government jobs, public payroll jobs. And I come at things a different way. I spent, I computed it the other day, half of my adult life in government service, one kind or another, and half in the private sector. Long before I was in the public sector, I worked for a living out in the oilfields of west Texas, built a company, and did what many here has in small or larger operations, I met a payroll. I took risks, and I made it work. I happen to think having held a job is not a bad qualification even for ENTITY. Look, the world economy is changing, and we have got to be in the lead of that change. Think of the economic changes you have seen right here in Ansonia, from moving from that brass and copper age in the mills along the Naugatuck to the new corporate headquarters in the industrial parks across the valley. Right now one in every six American manufacturing jobs is tied directly to exports. That does not count the economic ripple effect created when those workers pay mortgages or buy a car or feed the kids.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthechambercommerceansoniaconnecticut", "title": "Remarks to the Chamber of Commerce in Ansonia, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-chamber-commerce-ansonia-connecticut", "publication_date": "24-08-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5220, "text": "Since '88, since 1988, three-fifths of the economic growth has come from people in other countries buying what we do best, the products we make right here in America. We are the best manufacturers in the world, and do not let anybody tell you, do not you let that gloomy opposition tell you we cannot compete or say that we are a nation in decline. As President, I am working now to create jobs, new markets, markets in Moscow, markets in Mexico City that mean new American jobs. I am convinced that the answer is not to build a wall around our economy, not to put the Government in charge but to use the Government to help you literally go back to work in this country. That is what I want to tell you, how I am going to do it. open markets for American products. lower Government spending and tax relief, not spend and tax; tax relief and less Federal Government spending. And the other one is opportunities for small business. We have got to do better getting the regulatory burden off the back of these mom-and-pop, these small operators. We are going to keep doing it until we get that job done. You know my feeling about too many lawsuits in this country. I have been fighting to change that, blocked by this gridlocked Congress. We sue each other too much. We care for each other too little. We have got to break the back of those that are breaking this country with these damn lawsuits. New schools -- and I know we have got some teachers here, and God bless them. But I will tell you something. We need new schools to back up these teachers, new ideas. Our whole program, America 2000, is a good program to literally revolutionize how we bring our kids into the next century. I might say, we have got to win this fight on narcotics. Teenage use of cocaine is down, but we have just begun to fight. We have got to win it, clean out these schoolyards. You know, a big difference is, a big one, I do believe that they are too big in Government and spend too much. Last week I offered an idea to get the deficit down. We will give you a special box -- I believe that people should have it -- a special box on that tax return to check so that up to 10 percent of your income tax can go for one purpose, and that is to reduce the budget deficit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthechambercommerceansoniaconnecticut", "title": "Remarks to the Chamber of Commerce in Ansonia, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-chamber-commerce-ansonia-connecticut", "publication_date": "24-08-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5221, "text": "If Congress does not like it -- all these editorials that you read around here on some of these sophisticated journals do not like it -- but the Congress has failed to do it. So let us get the people a chance to check that box, and then we have to live with it. To help young people find that first job, a program we call the Youth Training Corps, to get inner-city kids off the mean streets and get them a second chance to build the skills they need to succeed. For older workers who have lost their job or worry that next pay envelope may have a pink slip, we have developed a new concept called skill grants, vouchers worth $3,000 to be used towards the training program of their choice. Our plan is based on empowering people to get the kind of training they want, not empowering the bureaucracies to hire more people. That is a very different approach than the approach the others are taking toward job training. The Governor of Arkansas says he is all for free enterprise. Then he proposes right out of the box the largest tax increase in history, much of it on the back of small business. I learned the hard way, holding out my hand to that gridlocked Congress, and they bit it off. Once you make one mistake you do not make it again. I am not going to go forward and go with this program of spending and taxes. We have literally proposed, and it is before Congress right now, eliminating over 200 programs and 4,000 projects. It is there; it is put down in detail. It is before this gridlocked Congress. We have got to do something about changing the Congress. If we had more people like Gary Franks, we would not have a gridlock problem. But the Congress has been controlled, they have been controlled by the same party for 38 years. Everything else has changed in the country; not the House of Representatives. Help me change the House. My opponent says he is for fiscal responsibility. He is against a balanced budget amendment. Says he is for a line-item veto, but the gridlocked Congress refuses to give it to ENTITY. I stand for something different. I want to see us cut that Federal spending with the help of a new Congress, get the taxes down so we can get the economy stimulated and let people keep a little more of what they earn. It is a big philosophical difference between the Bush-Quayle ticket on the one hand and Clinton-Gore on the other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthechambercommerceansoniaconnecticut", "title": "Remarks to the Chamber of Commerce in Ansonia, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-chamber-commerce-ansonia-connecticut", "publication_date": "24-08-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5222, "text": "Now, in this campaign, we have got to call it as we see it. We have got two different, fundamentally different approaches. I believe in the Government. Government, Government, of the Government, by the Government, for the Government . We are fighting against that because we happen to believe still that the power should flow from the people, so it is of the people, by the people, and for the people. Really, what is at stake here is the future of this country. We are in choppy waters. I heard the Reverend. I know it. People that are hurting and cannot find jobs when they need it. on the defense spending. I have cut defense, but we are not going to cut into the muscle of the defense. The other side wants to take $60 billion more than Colin Powell and Cheney tell me is the right level. We still have a tough world out there. While you are thinking about it, we do not needlessly need to throw another million defense workers out of work by cutting back on defense below the levels needed for national security. Let me just tell you, I wish Barbara Bush were here. This would be great for her morale. This would be great for her spirits. But I will tell you something. I want to be serious about this one point. When I drove in here today -- and I have been here as some of you know many, many times. My dad was a Senator from this State, and we grew up down the way. When I came in here this morning, a lot of the people out there were waving. I am sure they were not for me. They were there because I am privileged to be the President of the United States of America. But you sense something else out there along the highway. You sense this community feeling and this feeling of family. I want to tell you something. The cynics, the liberal theoreticians, they can ridicule me all they want when I talk about family values. But this one transcends Democrat. It transcends Republican. It gets to the heart of what our community is about. The community has been diminished by the decimation and sometimes the decline of the American family. I saw it today, that family spirit is still strong.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthechambercommerceansoniaconnecticut", "title": "Remarks to the Chamber of Commerce in Ansonia, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-chamber-commerce-ansonia-connecticut", "publication_date": "24-08-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5223, "text": "It is a pleasure to be here today at the first Italian-American Conference on Private Sector Initiatives. Yesterday we concluded this year's economic summit. I looked around that table at the leaders of some of the world's great democracies, and I could not help thinking how precious our common heritage is. It was a great Italian who said, the natural rights of personality, family, and society exist before the state. Those words, spoken by an Italian, are as American as the Declaration of Independence-for that matter, as British as the Common Law and as French as the writings of Montesquieu. They could be called the common credo of every democratic nation across the Earth. Yet if freedom, democracy, and the rights of man are to be preserved through the ages, free men and women must accept the responsibilities that go with their freedoms. And this is why I wanted to take some time out after the summit to meet with you, because as business men and women, as citizens, you have been leaders in taking up the responsibilities of liberty. Again and again, over the years, all of you have volunteered yourselves and your corporations to causes that have helped make life better for the people of both Italy and America and of people all over the world. When you have seen a need to be filled, a job to be done, you have not waited for government to lead the way; you have set out and got the work done yourselves. And let me say that we can see all around us testimony to the strength here in Italy of voluntarism and of private giving, of what we in America sometimes call private sector initiatives. It was a private sector initiative by Fiat that restored this magnificent building, the Palazzo Grassi. And just down the Grand Canal are the noble horses of St. Mark's Basilica, which through an initiative by Olivetti have toured the world, showing something of the beauty of Venice to many who will not have the opportunity to come to this great city. Yes, in country after country, private sector initiatives are teaching children, caring for the sick, helping the poor build better lives for themselves, and searching for ways to cure disease. Whether people are in sickness, sorrow, or in need, private sector initiatives have been created to answer the call. Last November in Paris, at the International Conference on Private Sector Initiatives, men and women from seven nations showed that yours is an international movement. Yesterday in Milan you continued the work you began in Paris with a new exchange of ideas.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheitalianamericanconferenceprivatesectorinitiativesveniceitaly", "title": "Remarks at the Italian-American Conference on Private Sector Initiatives in Venice, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-italian-american-conference-private-sector-initiatives-venice-italy", "publication_date": "11-06-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5224, "text": "In the meantime, of course, I have been meeting here in Venice with the leaders of the six leading industrial democracies. We have held productive discussions on subjects ranging from East-West relations to terrorism to economic policy and free trade. These meetings are important, and they have received, as they should, a great deal of attention from the press. And yet I cannot help thinking that any true history of our times will show that your work, and that of millions of free men and women all around the world, has done as much to build the future of our civilization as have all the statesmen in all the summits over the years. History has shown that governments alone cannot possibly meet the challenges of a growing world. I believe that private sector initiatives will provide many solutions to the challenges of the 21st century. They are already giving us lasting symbols of the friendships between democratic peoples and countries on which European and American peace and prosperity have been built over the last 40 years. In this regard, I am pleased to commend the National Italian-American Foundation for their efforts in restoring a magnificent garden here in Venice. This Italian-American Friendship Garden will be a lasting reminder of this meeting in Venice. And Jim Robinson has just announced another step in Italian-American friendship. This innovative program will contribute to the restoration of other Italian national treasures. It is a fine example of private sector initiatives at work. I want to thank all those involved in these projects as well as the members of my board of advisors on private sector initiatives and their Italian counterparts, who have made this conference possible. By shouldering the responsibilities of freedom, you are helping to preserve freedom, to preserve this great hope for all mankind that our countries represent. And the voices that thank you come not just from Italy and America, not just from Europe, but from throughout the world. And Frank, I have to tell you, in giving me this honor, which you have just given me, kind of makes things all right for the industry that I once was in, the motion picture industry. We had an actor there who was only being an actor in Hollywood long enough to get the money to come to Italy, because he aspired to an operatic career. And he went to Milan, and he studied. And then he was asked to sing in Pagliacci, the very spiritual fountainhead of opera. And he did an aria, and he received such thunderous and sustained applause that he had to repeat the aria as an encore.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheitalianamericanconferenceprivatesectorinitiativesveniceitaly", "title": "Remarks at the Italian-American Conference on Private Sector Initiatives in Venice, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-italian-american-conference-private-sector-initiatives-venice-italy", "publication_date": "11-06-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5225, "text": "And again the same sustained, thunderous applause, and again he sang Vesti la Giubba. And this went on until finally he motioned for quiet, and he tried to tell them how full his heart was for this reception. But, he said, I have sung 'Vesti la Giubba' now nine times. My voice is gone; I cannot do it again. And a voice from the balcony said, You will do it until you get it right. You know, all that we talked about, I just have to tell you one last little incident here that is really true of what brings us together here-private initiative. I am sure that our people have told you that there in Washington now, we have in the computers some 3,000 programs where some little hamlet or village or town has found a problem and a way to solve it themselves. And we keep this, because then when inquiries come from people that say what could we do about it, we go to the computers and are able to tell them how a program was set up privately by the people and made to work. A little town in Texas had something for several years called Christmas in April. All year long the people of that town kept track and watched for homes of elderly people or homes of people that were handicapped or very poor; and if there were things like leaking roofs and plumbing that did not work and so forth, they made a list during all the year. And then on April 1st the merchants that dealt in the products they needed-building materials and paint and so forth-would donate. But citizens of every calling, as volunteers, would show up on that April 1st, knock on the door, and say we are here to put a new roof on your house or paint your house or fix the plumbing or do what has to be done. That went on in that little town in Texas. Well, a couple of years ago, I was amazed to see some people that did not look like ordinary workmen in Washington, DC, nailing shingles on a roof and others painting a porch and so forth. I recognized a couple of judges among them. Believe it or not, Washington, DC, had discovered from that little town in Texas private initiative, and now had Christmas in April for the people, the poor that might be there in the Capital.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheitalianamericanconferenceprivatesectorinitiativesveniceitaly", "title": "Remarks at the Italian-American Conference on Private Sector Initiatives in Venice, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-italian-american-conference-private-sector-initiatives-venice-italy", "publication_date": "11-06-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5259, "text": "This is what they call a cameo appearance. I am here very briefly before rushing off to the Hilton Hotel, but I just cannot tell you how pleased I am to be with you. I told Abe Foxman here, Why, we are practically going steady! Because he was down here just last -- was it Thursday of last week with the head of a lot of these most prominent organizations. And I am delighted to be here with all of you today. I do not want to speak too long because Bobbie Kilberg, I think, is next, and she will kill me. But I might say she is doing an outstanding job -- a friend of longstanding and now in an outreach capacity here, high level at the White House, and performing with the expertise that we have come to expect of her. I understand that Secretary Kemp is coming, or maybe -- has he been, or coming over -- and Dick Thornburgh, I think, and our Chief of Staff. So, you will have a full program. I look at these briefing sessions as a two-way street. I hope that you will have a chance to exchange views, get questions and answers with some -- but in any event, an opinion at a forum for sharing of information and ideas. Certainly, the meeting that we had with Abe and those from the organization of presidents was that kind of meeting. And as I look around the room, I see many familiar faces and am delighted to be here. For three quarters of a century, the Anti-Defamation League has played a central role in preserving and protecting that sacred right of religious freedom. And there is no single greater contribution that one organization can make to the Nation, and for that you have earned our gratitude, certainly my respect. From the time the pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock, the principle of religious freedom and the notion of America as a haven for those who seek to exercise that freedom has been deeply rooted in the American heritage. And our national conscience must take note whenever that freedom is violated, and all Americans then must rush in to the defense of that freedom. As one of our forefathers wrote nearly 200 years ago, the Government of the United States gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. May the children of the stock of Abraham sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there should be none to make him afraid. I know that the ADL recently issued its annual report, detailing rising incidents of anti-Semitism in 1988.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmemberstheantidefamationleaguebnaibrith", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-anti-defamation-league-bnai-brith", "publication_date": "14-03-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5260, "text": "And I want to come over here to tell you that we must condemn all attacks on the Jewish religion, the Jewish heritage -- clearly, unequivocally, and without exception. This Nation must stand for tolerance, for pluralism, and a healthy respect for the rights of all minorities. And I know many of you, and we have worked together in various common causes many times over the years, and I hope you know how deeply I cherish the principle of religious freedom. And I know how hard you have fought not only for your own beliefs but to protect the principle that recognizes the rights of all men and women to worship as they believe right. So, we must continue to work together as we have in the past to zealously protect these rights for all Americans. Rest assured that my administration will work to uphold this principle as the very cornerstone of our freedom. And sometimes they question the power of the President, and I understand that. But they should never question the President's willingness to use the bully pulpit of the White House, as Teddy Roosevelt called it, to speak out for what is just and right. I have concentrated today here on just these brief remarks on antidiscrimination or other subjects of enormous concern. I wish you could have been there yesterday in the Oval Office to hear a representative of the Ethiopian Jews, a man who is living in Israel now, make this plea from the heart to continue the flow of the people there who are still not able to join their families in Israel. We had a fascinating meeting with Mr. Arens yesterday where I reassured him of the United States commitment to Israel as a strategic ally and, of course, a lasting friend. And I think he understands that. I hope that when the Prime Minister of Israel comes here that we can move forward in some way toward the peace that everybody here really hopes that Israel and its neighbors will achieve. Thank you for letting me drop in in this cameo appearance. And keep up your commitment, keep up that commitment to fight against bigotry wherever it may surface.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmemberstheantidefamationleaguebnaibrith", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-anti-defamation-league-bnai-brith", "publication_date": "14-03-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5268, "text": "Well, it is good once again to be with my friend, Prime Minister Abe, and the Japanese delegation. We have been able to forge, I think, an excellent relationship on a whole host of issues and this gives us an opportunity to continue to discuss both our security cooperation and our economic cooperation. The United States-Japanese alliance is one of the linchpins of our security as well as Japan's, and this gives us an opportunity to continue to deepen that relationship, building off the discussions we have had in Washington. It includes the realignment in Okinawa. I want to congratulate Prime Minister Abe on his recent legislation related to bolstering Japanese defense capabilities, and it will give us a chance to talk about a wide range of threats, both regionally and internationally. I also want to express my appreciation for the hard work that Shinzo has been involved with in building up stronger regional understandings. The trilateral meetings that have been taking place between Japan, China, and South Korea I think are especially important. And Shinzo and I both share an interest in continuing to foster rule of law, supporting international norms in areas like navigation-freedom of navigation and maritime law. And again, this bilateral gives us an opportunity to examine how we can work with some of the regional organizations like ASEAN in order to continue to maintain the stability and-that has been the hallmark of this region and has allowed for extraordinary prosperity and growth. And finally, we will be discussing a wide range of economic issues coming out of our meeting at the G-20. Both of us are interested in ratifying and implementing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which has been a major topic of conversation here at APEC and the G-20. There is a recognition that these kinds of high-standard rules that provide enforceable protections for labor and the environment are the wave of the future and could not have been done without Shinzo's leadership. We will also be talking about the climate change conference in Paris, and the importance of all of us working together in order to achieve a strong agreement that can protect the planet for future generations. So I want to say that on every issue that is of great importance to the United States of America, we have got a great partner in Japan and we very much appreciate it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspriormeetingwithprimeministershinzoabejapanmanilaphilippines", "title": "Remarks Prior to a Meeting With Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan in Manila, Philippines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prior-meeting-with-prime-minister-shinzo-abe-japan-manila-philippines", "publication_date": "19-11-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5269, "text": "I am very grateful to all of you for your kind words and for this magnificent gift. We will have a conflict in registration, because we no longer use the branding iron in our country except as ornaments or in our museums. But we now write the numbers on the horns of our cattle instead of placing the brand on their hip. I have collected some of the irons dating back to my grandfather's day, when he used to drive the cattle up the trail from Johnson City to Abilene. I do not think there was any particular significance to that in those days. But it is interesting that they went from Johnson City to Abilene and I now go out to Walter Reed to see the gentleman from Abilene a good deal. There is a great deal of iron beneath the gold of your gift and I find that symbolic of the purpose that we all share. All across this Nation of ours, there are people good people, prudent people, patriotic people-who know what it means to work and to save and to get ahead. Those people buy savings bonds and Freedom Shares. They hold on to them, because they know it is good for them and good for their country. For 27 years now, we have seen the people's prosperity and the savings bonds program grow hand in hand. So as we meet here this morning, we see a remarkable total of more than $52 billion outstanding that is owned by millions of Americans in all walks of life. Now, I do have a personal problem. I made a commitment to myself to buy a savings bond every month as long as I could, for my grandson. And I am going to have to make another commitment. That is going to involve some problems, because I am going to be out of a job on January 20. I will be out of a job, but I will have another commitment. So I may have to go see Secretary Fowler, who handled monetary problems so well for me, to get his help and judgment on how I can keep up my commitments. But I am going to keep them up, because I believe that you business and labor leaders and 'professional men who have made your own commitments are delivering a great service for this country. We ask some 4 1/2 million people to serve us in the Defense Establishment of this Nation, to give their all and a good many of them give their lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsremarksuponacceptingawardforhiseffortsfurtheringthesavingsbond", "title": "The President's Remarks Upon Accepting an Award for His Efforts in Furthering the Savings Bond Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-remarks-upon-accepting-award-for-his-efforts-furthering-the-savings-bond", "publication_date": "15-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5270, "text": "I want to express our very warm appreciation to you for your presence here today. First, I would like to express our thanks to the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra, who are giving up their summer by spending their tour in Mexico. Those kinds of sacrifices should be appreciated. We want to thank you very much. First, I want to say that I have been speaking through some extraordinary, in fact, both my wife and myself have been speaking through some very gifted interpreters in the last 24 hours to the people of this city and country, and we want to express ourselves more directly to them. After some debate and protest, it was decided that I would not make the speech in Spanish, but, instead, that Mrs. Kennedy would say a few words in behalf of both of us. Ladies and gentlemen, if anyone wishes that speech to be translated, they should call Ambassador Mann on the phone on Monday morning, and he will give the whole thing. I want to express our very warm thanks to all of you and through you to the people of Mexico. I had not realized how radical was the Mexican Revolution until I heard its slogan, which was Universal Suffrage, No Re-election. We have a good deal in common, but I am glad to say not everything. I also realize that there are many who feel that state visits are really in a sense parades, and the people are there, and the noise, and the parade passes, and then there is wind and dust and confetti, and days go on as they were before. This visit, it seems to me, has had three very definite results. In the first place, it has given me a chance to meet your distinguished President, and, therefore, in the future, on those matters which concern our countries-and there must be many, because we have great interests in common, and we have a common concern for the welfare of this hemisphere--it will be so much easier for us to work together for the common cause. And, therefore, for that reason alone this visit has been most rewarding to us in the United States, and I hope to Mexico.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheongivenhonorpresidentlopezmateos", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon Given in Honor of President Lopez Mateos", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-given-honor-president-lopez-mateos", "publication_date": "30-06-1962", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5271, "text": "Cahill, I thank you and all those who are responsible for this great honor. And I want to say that I happen to know that there is one among us here who has known, also, today, the same joy and even greater, if possible, than I could feel. And that is Dr. Cahill, himself, who this morning was presented by Cardinal Cooke, on behalf of the Pope, the Grand Cross Pro Merito Melitensi. He is the first American to ever receive this award. Your Eminence, the other clergy here at the head table, the other distinguished guests, and one in particular that I might pick out and mention, Teddy Gleason of the International Longshoremen's Association. And I mention him because on Sunday he is going to celebrate the 42d anniversary of his 39th birthday. Teddy, I have found that for some time, that makes it much easier to greet each one of these annual occasions. But I do thank you very much. You know, there is the legend in Ireland of the happy colleen of Ballisodare who lived gaily among the wee people, the tiny people, for 7 years, and then when she came home discovered that she had no toes. She had danced them off. I feel happy enough-when I get home tonight I am going to count mine. She sent her warm regards and her regrets. Unfortunately, on the last trip into town she picked up the bug. Now, I am happy to say that is not a situation for me, like the two sons of Ireland, who were in the pub one evening and one asked the other about his wife. And the other one says, Oh, I am sorry to hear that. A writer for the Irish press who was based in Washington, a correspondent for the press there, stated to me the other day or stated the other day about me-that I have only recently developed a pride in my Irish heritage or background, and that up till now I have had an apathy about it. Well, let me correct the record. I have been troubled until fairly recently about a lack of knowledge about my father's history. My father was orphaned at age 6. He knew very little about his family history. And so I grew up knowing nothing more beyond him than an old photograph, a single photo that he had of his mother and father, and no knowledge of that family history. But somehow, a funny thing happened to me on the way to Washington.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorknewyorkthe84thannualdinnertheirishamericanhistoricalsociety", "title": "Remarks in New York, New York, at the 84th Annual Dinner of the Irish American Historical Society", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-new-york-the-84th-annual-dinner-the-irish-american-historical-society", "publication_date": "06-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5272, "text": "When I changed my line of work about a year ago, it seemed that I became of a certain interest to people in Ireland, who very kindly began to fill me in. And so I have learned that my great grandfather took off from the village of Ballyporeen in County Tipperary to come to America. And that is not the limit to all that I have learned about that. Some years ago, when I was just beginning in Hollywood in the motion picture business, I had been sentenced for the few years I'd been there to movies that the studio did not want good, it wanted them Thursday. And then came that opportunity that every actor asks for or hopes for, and that was a picture that was going to be made and the biography of the late Knute Rockne, the great immortal coach of Notre Dame. Pat O'Brien was to play Rockne. And there was a part in there that from my own experience as a sports announcer I had long dreamed of, the part of George Gip. And generously, Pat O'Brien, who was then a star at the studio, held out his hand to a young aspiring actor, and I played Gip. Pat playing Rockne, he himself will say, was the high point of his theatrical career. My playing The Gip opened the door to stardom and a better kind of picture. I have been asked at times, What is it like to see yourself in the old movies, the reruns on TV? It is like looking at a son you never knew you had. But I found out in learning about my own heritage, going back to Ballyporeen that, believe it or not, what a small world it is, Pat O'Brien's family came from Ballyporeen. An historian has informed me that our family was one of the four tribes of Tara, and that from the year 200 until about 900 A.D., they defended the only pass through the Slieve Bloom Mountains. They held it for all those centuries and adopted the motto, The Hills Forever. The Hill Forever. I do remember my father telling me once when I was a boy, and with great pride he said to me, The Irish are the only people in the country, in America, that built the jails and then filled them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorknewyorkthe84thannualdinnertheirishamericanhistoricalsociety", "title": "Remarks in New York, New York, at the 84th Annual Dinner of the Irish American Historical Society", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-new-york-the-84th-annual-dinner-the-irish-american-historical-society", "publication_date": "06-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5273, "text": "I was a little perturbed even then, at that tender age, because at the sound of pride in his voice and from the way I'd been raised, I could not quite understand why that was something to be proud of, until I then later learned, which he had never explained to me, that he was referring to the fact that the overwhelming majority of men wearing the blue of the police department in America were of Irish descent. You know, those were not the only jobs that were open to the Irish. Back in the high day of vaudeville, long before sound pictures drove it out, there were, very popular in this country, comedians who would reach great stardom in vaudeville with a broad German accent. German comedians coming on Ach und Himmel Sic der. What is little known in show business is that almost without exception, they were Irish. I was on a mission to England for our government some 10 years ago. I should say to Europe, to several countries, and finally wound up and the last country was Ireland. On the last day in Ireland, I was taken to Cashel Rock. I did not know at that time that it is only 25 miles from Ballyporeen. But I do know that the young Irish guide who was showing us around the ruins of the ancient cathedral, there on the rock, finally took us to the little cemetery. We walked with great interest and looked at those ancient tombstones and the inscriptions. Remember me as you pass by, for as you are, so once was I. But as I am, you too will be, so be content to follow me. To follow you I am content, I wish I knew which way you went. But the Irish, like many, a great many of the people and like my grandfather, great-grandfather, were driven to the New World by famine and by tragedies of other kinds. The Irish they built the railroads, they opened the West wearing the blue and gold of the United States Cavalry. And it goes all the way back in our history. George Washington said, When our friendless standard was first unfurled, who were the strangers who first mustered around our staff?. And when it reeled in the fight, who more brilliantly sustained it than Erin's generous sons?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorknewyorkthe84thannualdinnertheirishamericanhistoricalsociety", "title": "Remarks in New York, New York, at the 84th Annual Dinner of the Irish American Historical Society", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-new-york-the-84th-annual-dinner-the-irish-american-historical-society", "publication_date": "06-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5274, "text": "And a century and a half later, who else than George M. Cohan would write of the Grand Old Flag, the Stars and Stripes, and Yankee Doodle Dandy with the line, I am a real live nephew of my Uncle Sam. There must have been a Divine plan that brought to this blessed land people from every corner of the Earth. And here, those people kept their love for the land of their origin at the same time that they pledged their love and loyalty to this new land, this great melting pot. They worked for it, they fought for it and, yes, they died for it and none more bravely than Erin's generous sons. Tragedy, as I have said, very often was the impetus that sent many to America. The Cardinal prayed and His Holiness, the Pope, plead for peace when he visited Ireland. I think we all should pray that responsible leaders on both sides and the governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland can bring peace to that beautiful Isle once again. And once again, we can join John Locke in saying, O Ireland, is not it grand you look Like a bride in her rich adornment? And with all the pent-up love in my heart, I bid you top o' the mornin'! No, I have no apathy, no feeling at all, I am just so grateful that among the other things that happened when I was allowed to move into public housing I had a chance, finally, to learn of the very rich heritage that my father had left me. And I can only say once again, with heartfelt thanks, I wear this and take it home with a feeling of great honor, and say something that I know to all of you is as familiar as top o' the mornin' or anything else. May the road rise beneath your feet, the sun shine warm upon your face, and the wind be always at your back, and may God, until we meet again, hold you in the hollow of his hand.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorknewyorkthe84thannualdinnertheirishamericanhistoricalsociety", "title": "Remarks in New York, New York, at the 84th Annual Dinner of the Irish American Historical Society", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-new-york-the-84th-annual-dinner-the-irish-american-historical-society", "publication_date": "06-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5288, "text": "Every time I stand next to them I look like a little kid. I want to thank three people who are just extraordinarily important to the project of rebuilding our country and have just been great friends of mine, great friends of the Democratic Party--you already heard from one--please give it up for Governor Tim Kaine; our DNC finance chair, Jane Stetson, who is racking up a lot of frequent flier miles; and Andy Tobias, our DNC treasurer--hey, Andy. It is great to see all of you here tonight, wonderful to see so many good friends, many of you who were there from the beginning of this campaign. And I want you to all know that I appreciate everything that you have done, not just for the campaign, but also what you have done for the country and what you have done for the party. Many of you were invested in this campaign at the very beginning when nobody could pronounce my name. And you'd tell your friends, There is this young guy, I really think he is got something. So you had to confront a lot of skepticism, a lot of confusion. Some of you were involved in a campaign for the first time, and some of you got involved for the very first time in a very long time, because you believed that we were in a defining moment in our history and that your voice could make a difference. Not a single day goes by where I do not think about all the time and the energy, the money, the commitment, the unyielding faith that you put into our campaign, because it was not just about winning an election, it was about changing a country. Last year, we asked you to take on something new. We asked you to help us keep the promises that we made in the campaign, help to bring about the changes that we had talked about together. And a lot of you have worked hard to do that. You have continued to be engaged in education policy, in foreign policy, and helping us at a grassroots level and continuing to finance our ability to get our message out. It is made the successes of the last year possible. We upheld the principle of equal pay for equal work. We lifted the ban on stem cell research and restored science to its rightful place in America. We provided health care to 4 million children who now have it who did not have it before. We passed the strongest veterans budget in decades.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5289, "text": "We protected families from getting ripped off by credit card companies and children from being targeted by big tobacco, and helped consumers deal with the twin plagues of mortgage fraud and predatory lending. We appointed Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. We passed a service bill named for Ted Kennedy that is giving young and old a chance to serve their country and their communities. We are working with Congress to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. Oh, by the way, and in the meantime, we prevented the worst financial crisis from getting even worse, turned the economy from contraction to expansion, made the largest investment in clean energy in history, the largest investment in education in decades, expanded the Pell grant program, dealt with a H1N1 virus on the side. That is what your support has helped us do at home. Abroad, we have begun a new era of engagement. We are working with our partners to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, seeking a world free of them. We are working with other nations to confront climate change. We are now a leader and not a follower in that critical mission. We banned torture. We are rebuilding our military. We are reaffirming our alliances. We have begun to leave Iraq to its own people, as I committed to doing in the campaign. And we have charted a new way forward in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We are making progress every single day in taking the fight to Al Qaida and across the globe. And I went to Cairo on behalf of the American people to begin a new dialogue with the Muslim world. We are living up to our obligations as a wealthy nation, helping to promote food security around the world, helping to deal with diseases around the world. We are living up to a moment that demands American leadership by standing with the people of Haiti as we speak. So in ways large and small, we have begun to deliver on the change that we talked about, the change that you believed in and that you campaigned hard for. We have got a lot more work to do. As I said, the day we took office, we confronted a financial system on the verge of collapse; we were losing 700,000 jobs per month; a $1.3 trillion deficit; two wars that frankly had not been paid for and were costly in every sense of the word.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5290, "text": "A lot of the solutions we proposed, the decisions we took, they were not quick, they were not easy, and they were not popular. But we decided we were going to go govern, we were going to put politicking on hold to get this country out of the mess it was in. I mentioned this to a group I spoke to earlier. You know, pundits act surprised about the fact that we spent so much political capital. Well, you know, I did not get elected to play it safe. And I did not govern, and I do not govern, by checking the polls every few days. I know that is the habit in Washington, but that is not the obligation I owe the American people, that is not the promise I made to you. And because we took bold and swift and coordinated action, we can stand here today and say we averted another depression. We broke the back of the recession. So the worst of the storm has passed. But, as all of you know, the devastation remains. We have got 10 percent unemployment. Many of you watching at home, as you go around the country and your individual communities, you see the stores shuttered and the foreclosed businesses; friends and neighbors, family members who still cannot find work. This is on top of a decade that had been tough for middle class families all across the country. They had not seen their incomes go up in years. Their costs skyrocketing at the same time as their wages were stagnant. For 2 years, I heard stories all across the country, everywhere I go. I heard stories about people trying their best to hold on; a family sitting around the kitchen table wondering if they were going to be able to retire on schedule, if they were going to be able to finance a college education for their kids, wondering when would health care costs stop climbing, when would their premiums start stabilizing. And people started expressing doubts about whether the dream that generations built and defended, the American Dream, was slipping away. That is the reason I ran for ENTITY. That is the reason you supported me. And that is why we are going to continue to do everything we can to create an economy that has not just recovered back to the status quo, but an economy where hard work is valued and responsibility is rewarded, and where businesses are hiring and wages are rising, and where our middle class is getting stronger and more secure. But we have got to do more.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5291, "text": "So we are going to give tax breaks and loans to small businesses to help them hire new workers and raise their wages and invest in new plants and equipment. We are going to put even more Americans to work on clean energy facilities and upgrading our infrastructure to meet the challenges of the 21st century. We are going to create incentives for consumers to make their homes more energy efficient, creating jobs and saving families money. And we are going to look at our Tax Code, because it is time we ended practices like giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas instead of investing in companies that are creating jobs right here in the United States of America. But the truth is, these steps alone will not make up for 7 million jobs that have been lost over the last 2 years. They are not going to, alone, provide the economic security that is been dwindling for middle class families over the last decade. The only way we do that is to lay a strong foundation for growth over the long term. And the things that we talked about during the campaign are the things that still need to be done. They have been put off by Washington for too long. Change is easy if you are just talking about tinkering around the edges. Change is harder when you actually dig in and try to deal with the structural problems that have impeded our progress for too long. This is where we run headlong into the lobbyists and the special interests and the bitterness and misinformation that characterizes so much of our politics, which means that some of you may be feeling discouraged, because it feels like things have taken longer than you might have expected. I knew this was going to take a long time, but I knew the fight was worth it. And we have got to keep up on this fight. The forces of the status quo, they may not give an inch, but I do not give an inch either. And you should not give an inch either. We did not come this far to put things off, or to play it safe, or to take the easy road. We came here to solve problems for the next generation, not for the next election. That means opening up this Government to the people. That is why we post all our visitors online. That is why we have excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs and seats on boards and commissions. That is why I have called on Congress to put their earmarks online so everybody can see what is going on. That is part of the change that we promised.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5292, "text": "We have got to change the tone of Government and politics here in Washington and all across America. I am not going to give up on that either. You know, the American people are right to be frustrated about a Washington where every day is election day and the basic theory is, If you lose, I win, where we are not measuring success by what we are doing for the American people, but how we look in the latest Gallup. That is why I went to the House Republican caucus the other day. We had a good discussion-- --about the challenges that are facing the American people, our ideas to solve them. That was good for the country. It is good for our democracy. I had fun. Now, there are some issues that Democrats and Republicans are not going to agree on, and that is okay. We are going to tussle from time to time. There may be some issues that we do agree on, or at least we say we agree on. So I told my Republican friends I want to work together with them where I can, and I meant it, because I do not want to just score political points. I have got time to campaign down the road. In the meantime, there is a lot of work that we have got to get done together. And I told them I will also call them out if they say they want to work on something and then when I offer a hand I get nothing in return. The American people have to understand that. The old playbook of just blocking everything, I understand that is easier than actually doing something, and sometimes it may be more politically effective, but that is not what is going to move our country forward. That is why you joined our campaign. That is what you have helped deliver over the last year. That is why I need your help now. That is why Tim and everybody in the party needs your help now, because you know as well as anyone that change does not come without a fight. We have got some fights to wage. We have got some fights to make sure that we are sparking innovation and igniting a clean energy sector where American workers are making solar panels and wind turbines and cutting-edge batteries for the new plug-in hybrid that leads on clean energy, because the economy that leads on clean energy, I believe, is going to lead the global economy. We are going to keep fighting to make sure that America has the best education possible for every child.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5293, "text": "And we are going to reward success through our Race to the Top program. We want every child to meet their potential, and that is why we are going to make sure that young people all across America can afford college without going broke. We can do that. And we could do it this year. We are going to keep fighting for commonsense rules of the road for Wall Street. And I want to be clear--there is a lot of talk about Wall Street, Main Street--we need a financial sector that works. We need businesses that are thriving, and they have got to raise capital; that will help them hire workers. That is part of what this crisis has reminded us. But we have got to ensure that our economy is not brought to its knees by outdated and antiquated financial rules and the irresponsibility of a few. And that is why I expect Democrats and Republicans to want to make sure that we do not find ourselves in this same situation again. That is why we have to have financial regulatory reform. And yes, that is why we are going to fix the health care system, a health care system that too often works for insurance companies better than it does for individual Americans. And again, I did not take this on because it was easy. I got David Axelrod; he does all the polls. He whispers in my ear, Man, this health care thing is hard. I am a amateur historian, so I know that seven ENTITYs, starting with Teddy Roosevelt, could not get this done. But I took it on not for its political value; I took it on because families are dealing with skyrocketing premiums and skyrocketing out-of-pocket costs and insurance companies that routinely deny coverage because of preexisting conditions, or drop people altogether when they get sick. We took it on because the costs were killing small businesses and creating an uneven playing field for our international companies, and it was eating into workers' take-home pay and canceling raises. And we took it on because it is the single best way--in fact, the only way--that we are actually going to get control of our Federal budget. So when I hear deficit hawks --quote, unquote--out there who say they want to control the Federal budget and are not willing to do a darn thing about the skyrocketing costs of health care, I get a sense they are not entirely on the level.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5294, "text": "Because our proposal for health care reform, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would bring it down by $1 trillion over the next two decades. And even in Washington that is a lot of money. I took it on because every single day, 15,000 Americans join the tens of millions who do not have health insurance, and 18 million--18,000 Americans die because of the lack of health insurance. That is what we campaigned on. That is what we are working to get it done, with Democrats and with Independents and with Republicans. We want to bring down costs and end the worst insurance practices and finally give every American a chance to have the security of quality, affordable health care. I am not going to walk away from those fights, and I do not expect you will either. I mean, the odds were a lot less that I'd ever be standing here than they are that we can solve some of these big problems. I mean, think about it. Tim was--when Tim endorsed me in Richmond, first endorsement I got outside of Illinois of any elected official--here he is, newly minted Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia--there was one thing that was clear, and that is he was term limited. But do not you guys--you remember this. Nobody gave us a chance. You know, the same folks who are now writing about what next, and what is happened to the Obama, these are the same folks who were writing about how he does not stand a chance; how after New Hampshire, that was it; after Pennsylvania, that was it, right? We went through this. And they were saying your faith was misplaced and that you have set your sights too high and your hope is naive and Washington will not change. And now all of them are feeling like, See, we told you, Washington does not change. And they are feeling kind of self-satisfied about the fact that we have not yet gotten health care done. Well, let me tell you something. You did not listen to those voices then. You proved that nothing can stop the power of millions of people who want to see an America that is living up to its values and its ideals. That is what you did. And that is what I am asking you to do again. I want to remind you, we do not quit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser11", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-11", "publication_date": "04-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5332, "text": "Over the last few weeks, I have been talking a lot about America's economic future. I have told you how I believe we should go about creating strong, sustained growth; how we should pay down our long-term debt in a balanced way; and most of all, what we should do right now to create good, middle class jobs so people who work hard can get ahead. I have said that this is the defining issue of our time, and I mean it. I have said that this is a make-or-break moment for the middle class, and I believe it. The decisions we make over the next few years will have an enormous impact on the country we live in, and the one we pass on to our children. Right now we are still fighting our way back from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Our businesses have created 4.3 million new jobs over the last 27 months, but we are not creating them fast enough. And we are facing some pretty serious headwinds, the effects of the recent spike in gas prices to the financial crisis in Europe. We have the answers to these problems. We have plenty of big ideas and technical solutions from both sides of the aisle. That is not what is holding us back. What is holding us back is a stalemate in Washington. Last September, I sent Congress a jobs bill full of the kinds of bipartisan ideas that could have put over a million Americans back to work and helped bolster our economy against outside shocks. I sent them a plan that would have reduced our deficit by $4 trillion in a balanced way that pays for the investments we need by cutting unnecessary spending and by asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little bit more in taxes. Since then, Congress has passed a few parts of that jobs bill, like a tax cut that is allowing working Americans to keep more of your paycheck every week. But on most of the ideas that would create jobs and grow our economy, Republicans in Congress have not lifted a finger. They'd rather wait until after the election in November. Just this past week, one of them said, Why not wait for the reinforcements? That is a quote, and you can bet plenty of his colleagues are thinking the same thing. This is not about who wins or loses in Washington. This is about your jobs and your paychecks and your children's future. There is no excuse for Congress to stand by and do nothing while so many families are struggling, no reason whatsoever.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsweeklyaddress395", "title": "The President's Weekly Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-weekly-address-395", "publication_date": "16-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5333, "text": "I WANT to express my appreciation to all of you for your kind welcome, and also to take this occasion to express my great appreciation-and I think the appreciation of us all--to Senator Jackson who assumed the chairmanship of the Democratic Party at the Convention, who was greatly responsible for our success in November and has been an invaluable aid during the transition. Whatever has been done that is useful in the party in the last 5 or 6 months he has played a great part in it. And I feel that the party has served a most useful national purpose--and while Senator Jackson is obligated to serve the people of Washington in the Senate, I know that we can continue to count on him in the days to come for counsel and advice and support. So I hope we will all stand and give a good cheer to Scoop Jackson. Scoop automatically loses his share of the $4-million debt--we are not going to let him in on it. John Bailey has become the proprietor, along with Mac, of this enterprise. I think we are particularly fortunate to have John Bailey. I heard Governor Lawrence in his seconding speech say the trouble with everything is that they do not know enough of what is going on here in Washington; they ought to get out in the field. I agree with him completely. We have got a man from the field who knows what is wrong here in Washington, and I am delighted that John Bailey is going to take over this job. He is more popular today than he will be any time again in his life. I will feel that he is doing a good job when you all say, Well, Kennedy is all right, but Bailey is the one who is really making the mistakes. That is the way it was in Connecticut. So that is what he is going to do down here. But I am delighted that he is going to do it. It is a sacrifice for him. But I think we are getting the services of someone who works in the party year in and year out, understands what the party can do, understands what the role of the Chairman is-and I must say that I am delighted to see him assuming the position vacated by Senator Jackson. Lastly, I want to thank all of you for being with us at the inaugural. The party is not an end in itself it is a means to an end. And you are the people who, in victory and defeat, have maintained the Democratic Party, maintained its traditions and will continue to do so in the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmeetingthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks at a Meeting of the Democratic National Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-meeting-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "21-01-1961", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5339, "text": "I HAVE had a very special project this week. I have been trying to get at least 50 new women in the Gridiron Club, and as many as I can in the National Press Club. But I am glad that we have got them in the Defense Department. When I look at a group like this, I have no trouble understanding why Bob McNamara is the greatest Secretary of Defense this country has ever had. With women like you working with him, I do not think he could lose. In fact, I would have never started my Fifty Women in Government campaign if I had known that Bob McNamara already had 50 women on this committee, because it looks like he has the market cornered. Someone asked how it is possible for women to understand politics when they have to depend almost entirely on their husbands for political education. Until recently this same question could apply, I guess, to military science. Women could hardly be expected to know anything about the military because they had to depend almost entirely on their husbands for military education, but the world is changing and the times are changing, and so are the services. I want to thank you for your efforts. Military service is becoming an attractive career to women, and we are mighty proud that it is, because it will be a better service, be a better career. And too many people always think, I have observed, of the military in negative terms. We must quit thinking of it just as a force for destruction, or as an instrument for war. A call prompted me the other day, when we were dealing with all the nuclear weapons and the warheads and the bombs and everything, and I thought that might be a good place to have a woman, to sit on the Atomic Energy Commission, because they bring into the world the men who fight the wars and do the dying. So I was able to persuade Dr. Bunting of Radcliffe to come down and she has already been confirmed by the Senate. You women are going to be represented in that field as you are in the military. Now, I think it is a myth we must destroy-about force for destruction and instrument of war. We do not want that to be universally accepted, for in a democracy the armed services have a creative role to play and that creative role must be as an agent of peace. Their purpose is not only to deter war, but to help improve the quality of our society and to serve the public good and to train young men and women for useful service.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedefenseadvisorycommitteewomentheservices0", "title": "Remarks to the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-defense-advisory-committee-women-the-services-0", "publication_date": "28-04-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5340, "text": "Once a career in the military for women meant just a clerical job, or an assignment as a nurse, or a nurse's aide in some clinic. This myth, too, is already being shattered, for today women are making important professional and technical contributions to the military as scientists, as engineers, as mathematicians, as administrators, as managers, as accountants, as teachers, as lawyers, as linguists. I think we need more women to play even more important roles. I think you can help encourage that. The Armed Forces faces serious shortages of nurses and dietitians and therapists. Secretary McNamara and I are counting on you to help us find these women and to recruit them. We want you to go out on the highways and the byways and tell the young women of America that this is no longer a stag Government, this is no longer a stag administration, and no longer is there anything like a one-man's army. Tell them it is their Government, it belongs to them, and it is their army, too. We want and we need them, and we urge them to come in. It has taken us nearly 150 years to accept the truth of what Susan Anthony used to preach when she said, It was we the people, not we the white people, or the male citizens, nor we the male citizens, nor we just the male citizens, but we the whole people who form this Union. Today women have become a greater force in the quality of American life. Military life is no exception, and all of us are in your debt for making this possible. I have heard it said that women always have the last word, because they have a dozen arguments left when the men are all run out. But I am sure you have a dozen arguments left in support of the women's role in the military or else you would not be serving on this committee. But for all of us, for Secretary McNamara, for the Joint Chiefs, for the service Secretaries, for the country, I want to thank you for your devotion to duty. I want to tell you how proud we are of you. We have never been stronger in the history of our country. I do not think we have ever had better opportunities to seek and ferret out and promote peace in the world. We know that is what you women want to do. I was reminded this morning of a very touching experience two friends of mine had. Bethune was meeting with General Marshall one time during the war.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedefenseadvisorycommitteewomentheservices0", "title": "Remarks to the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-defense-advisory-committee-women-the-services-0", "publication_date": "28-04-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5341, "text": "She got up and asked to be excused because she had to go see--Mary McLeod Bethune, you know, was a very able and very prominent Negro woman who was a great educator and exercised a great influence on my life. She worked very closely with me several years in the Federal Government. She asked General Marshall to excuse her because she had to go see the President, and someone asked her what she was going to see the President about--President Roosevelt, whose picture hangs over there. She said, I am going to see him about women in the services, and about letting them do something besides the trivial details and the clerks and the minor jobs. That made quite an impression, that she was going to see the President. The next day they were meeting again in this consulting group and Mrs. Bethune got up and asked to be excused, and said she was sorry, but she had to go see the President again. They said, What are you going to see him for the second day? She said, I am going to get the answer, and evidently the answer was a good one, because here you are and I see a good many majors and colonels all over the place. We are very proud of it. A good many people have made great sacrifices to build this instrument of peace that we call the Defense Department. I see at some of our bases Peace Is Our Mission. Beginning with the Secretary, and the Under Secretaries, and the Assistant Secretaries, like Mr. Paul, these men have left jobs, some of them paying as much as a half a million a year, to come here and be harangued and harassed and browbeaten and fussed at and quarreled with in order to build the most efficient and most powerful peace machine we have ever had. I feel comforted that you women are here to help them and to encourage them and maybe to comfort them some in these times of tribulation. So you are welcome to the White House. We are proud of your service and long may it continue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedefenseadvisorycommitteewomentheservices0", "title": "Remarks to the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-defense-advisory-committee-women-the-services-0", "publication_date": "28-04-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5355, "text": "And considering that we caught President Obama and sleepy Joe Biden, spying on our campaign, treason, we will probably be entitled to another four more years after that. I want to thank you, and Art and Brandon, you are incredible. I have known you now a long time. Right from the beginning, we had the chemistry, we had that good chemistry-I will sit down. You know, it is 122 degrees in this place. And we have our great Governor. Governor, can we make it a little bit, just a little. This is like a test. You think Joe Biden could do this? So, I am thrilled to be in Yuma, Arizona--to proudly accept the endorsement of the National Border Patrol Council, that is a big deal. And they are great friends of mine. And we are building the wall. Next week, we will be up to 300 miles of incredible wall. We are very tough at the border. When people want to come in, for our farmers, et cetera, et cetera, we are not going to hurt our farmers, but we have never had better numbers than we have right now. And that is been helped because we are at a little bit over 280 miles right now, we have never been helped like this. Wall, there are two things, in a thousand years you can come back, two things will never, you know with technology it is obsolete before you even put it in the box, but two things never get old wheels and walls. If you come back in a thousand years, you will say, Well, we still have wheels in walls. The National Border Patrol Council is the official union representing the incredible heroes of the United States Border Patrol. They have been my friends from the beginning. To every border agent, and I just met some unbelievable people backstage, these are great people, and every family member here today, you have earned the everlasting gratitude of our nation. And I want to thank you very much. As you know, better than anyone, the survival of our nation is at stake in this election. And I will tell you, I never thought I'd say it because we had a great election. We had a great election a little while ago. Four years ago, I never thought I'd say anything could compete with 2016. This election that we are going into is the most important election in the history of our country--because we had crooked Hillary, but this is something, these people are sick.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5356, "text": "And we have to make sure that this radical left socialist and beyond, because this is beyond socialism, this is beyond socialism, that it does not happen, or we will indeed have Venezuela on steroids. So, we cannot do it. Joe Biden is the puppet of the radical left-wing movement that seeks the complete elimination of America's borders and boundaries. They want to take the wall down, they do not want to have borders, they want to have sanctuary cities, lots of bad things they want. Can you believe that? Joe Biden has pledged to abolish immigration enforcement, suspend all removals, provide free government healthcare, and, you know, they want to give it to illegal aliens. You do not get it. You do not get it. This is what they want to do. We will have people coming into our country that never even thought of it before. You get free education, you get free healthcare, why would not they come? Let us go to America. The Biden plan would unleash a flood of illegal immigration like the world has never seen. Biden's plan is the most radical, extreme, reckless, dangerous, and deadly immigration plan ever put forward by a major party candidate. It must be defeated, and it will be defeated on November 3rd. At last night's Democrat convention, which by the way, got very bad ratings, I have to tell you. They talk about unity. They want to bring unity. And then you listen to Michelle Obama's speech, which was obsolete by the time it got there. She taped it. No, no, she taped the speech. She must have taped it about three weeks before. She could not even-look, number, I'd like to tape, maybe I will tape-I am speaking next Thursday, maybe I will tape it. That is so much nicer, to tape it, you do it, nice air-conditioned room. And she not only taped it, but tell me when you hear a divisive speech-you know, they talk about me as being a divider. I bring people together. We were bringing people together. We were bringing people together like never before. Success was bringing everyone together, and then we got hit with the China virus, but we were bringing people together. But one of the opening speakers last night said that America will go to hell if we do not have open borders.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5357, "text": "When a country does not have borders, you do not have a country. You do not have a country. Today, a Democrat speaker at the convention said, We are talking about abolishing the police, we are talking about abolishing ICE, we are talking about abolishing prisons. Biden's campaign has turned into a cult for open border and other Zealots. By the way, they want to double and triple your taxes, they want to increase regulations--they want to spend very little money on our vets, after we took care of our vets better than anyone's. And they want to spend much less on our military, we have totally rebuilt. Two and a half trillion dollars, we have totally rebuilt our military. Bernie Sanders declared, in his speech, many of the ideas that just a few years ago were considered radical, are now mainstream. But if he did, he is been brought so far left that our country will not be the country that we know. It will have problems; it will go down. And right now, who has a 401k? Alright, and then the rest of you, many of you have stocks, and you do it a different way. And if you held on, like I said to do, we went down a little while we got hit with a virus. Now, NASDAQ just broke an all-time record. SNP just broke an all-time record. Socialism is the mainstream of the Biden campaign and it is not the mainstream of America. Remember I said, we will never have a socialist country. The people of Arizona, our great state, we love Arizona. I won it last time--by a lot. And I hear we are gonna win it by even more this time. Do not forget, last time I talked, I said we are going to give you your tax cuts, I gave them to you. I said, we are going to give you a massive regulation cuts. We are going to give you great everything. We even did Right to Try medicine. You know all about that. We did things that I did not even talk about it, we did. We did a thing called the Space Force. I am the only candidate that gave you more than I promised in the campaign. But we will head to the polls and together we will stop the left and win four more years in the White House. We are joined today by some incredible people, friends of mine, great, great people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5358, "text": "And I want to congratulate your Governor because we had a spike, and he knocked that spike out so fast. Are you sure you even had a spike? Doug Ducey, a great governor, great man, and a somebody that won by about 16 or 17 points. What a job you have done. A friend of mine and somebody who is a great fighter pilot, and I had a lot of people tell me she could really wheel the Warthog, right? She said, I love that plane, but she was a great, great fighter pilot, one of the best they were telling me. This was a group, and they knew her very well. A lot of friends you have. And specifically she said, Could you extend that plane? But Martha McSally is an extraordinary person, and she is fighting for us, and she is helping us, and we have to bring her into the center. And she is running against a gentlemen who is, uh, when you read what he is done, when you read what he said about the second amendment and about all other things--you are not going to want to vote for him. You are not going to want to have them play with your second amendment. I will tell you what. If I were not ENTITY, I do not believe, Doug, you'd have a second amendment right now. The pressure that was put on to get rid of it, or to basically obliterate it, make it so it is meaningless. You will always have the right to bear arms. You will always have that. A few friends of mine who are warriors. When they went and they tried to make a play at your President, they had to get through the House. Other than Mitt Romney, one half a vote. Another friend of mine and incredible fighter, and somebody that loves his state, and I will tell you, the Freedom Caucus, right? And we have a man named Andy Biggs here. And he loves our vets, and he loves our military, and you love our second amendment, right? And we are not going to do anything with it. They will destroy that second amendment. Just remember I said it, but you are not going to have to worry about it because it is not going to happen. A woman who really distinguished herself, she became a star. We want her on our side. We got to have her on our side.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5359, "text": "Also, thanks to Arizona Republican party chairman, I knew this was going to happen. That is what they say. If we do not win, this country is in big trouble. And a man who did not choke under pressure. He kicked for 11 years. You ever see a golfer. They miss a three-footer. They miss a three-footer. They cannot take it back. He is one of the best kickers ever. You could not get a good seat, Jay. I remember the 61-yarder. But the only thing is, I will bet you this man would stand, only stand, for our National Anthem. That is one thing-that is one thing I can tell you. And if they do not stand for our flag, if they do not stand for our National Anthem, I turn off the game. Other than that, I'd like to watch, but I turn off the game. And by the way, I thought they learned that lesson a little while ago. I thought they learned that lesson two years ago, but maybe not, but they will. They will learn it again. For decades, Washington politicians like Biden allowed an endless supply of illegal foreign labor to decimate American jobs and wages. They allowed criminal gangs to menace, maim and terrorize innocent citizens. They would maim and terrorize, and we have done something with our border patrol. And by the way, ICE, ICE is great. ICE has taken out thousands and thousands of MS-13, and you do not want the job. None of you want the job. It is a tough job, but they like it, and they are great Patriots, and they have done a fantastic job. They ceded control of the border to the most dangerous and ruthless cartels on earth. And what we have done, did you ever notice the caravans? What happened to the caravans? You know, we were paying hundreds of millions of dollars to Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, hundreds of millions. And I said, Well, why are we doing that? When we caught a murderer and we wanted to bring it back to one of those countries, they would not take him. And they would not take him under the Obama administration. So, we got stuck with them because they'd fly in. They'd say, Do not land your plane. And I said something very simple. We do not have to do that. We are not going to pay you anymore. We stopped payment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5360, "text": "We stopped payment. We stopped payment and they called. They said, We'd love to take them. We'd be honored to take them. So, we take them back by the thousands, by the thousands. They let lethal poisonous drugs pour freely into our schools and our communities, but no more. The cruel and heartless portrayal of the American people ended the day I took the oath of office, and now that we have more than half of the wall built, and do you notice they do not talk about the wall anymore. I went, Look at all those people back there. They do not talk about the wall anymore. We got the wall. It is going to be up to 300 next week and--it is going to be finished very soon. And as soon as we want, all of a sudden, they never talk about it. But you know where I talk about it? We have never had numbers like this because that big portion of wall already built, you do not get through it. You cannot get through it. You can climb Mount Everest, and you are going to have an awful hard time getting over that sucker. I stood up to the lobbyists. Everybody fought us, the Democrats, everyone. I fought the special interests. I kept every single promise that I made, and now I am doing it with the drug companies. I just created Favorite Nation. So, if a nation buys it for less and they buy it for a fraction of what we pay, the drug companies have to sell it to us for the same price. And they are spending billion-they are spending so much. They are spending millions of dollars on advertising. Anytime you see an ad from a drug company, and they are rich, the pharma, it is called Big Pharma, the number one lobbyist. They spend millions and millions, hundreds of millions of dollars online. Anytime you see, anytime at all, you see an ad by Big Pharma against me, you know your drug prices are coming down. And we are giving the rebate that creates tremendous wealth for the middleman, the rebate. It is going to the people now. We are bringing the rebate and it is going to the people. I have a lot of people in that industry do not like me too much. But you are going to get 50.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5361, "text": "You are going to get, and the Democrats would never do it, Biden would never do it because he does not understand it, but they would never do it. They would in a million years, they would not do it. It took a lot of guts to do it. I had a lot of people, a lot of good politicians go, Sir, I do not think you should do it. I wonder why you are saying that, but we did it. We are going to have drug prices reduced over a very short period of time, by not 2%, and last year they went down a little bit, first time in 51 years that drug prices went down but a little bit, we are going to have prices dropping 50, 60, and even 70%. And I am proud to say that they have achieved the most secure border, our border patrol, in the history of the United States of America. We now have the most secure border we have ever had and it is only going to get better. And we want people to come in, but we want them to come in through merit, right? And we want people that are going to come in and are going to love for our country, not hate our country. Here in Yuma, Arizona, we have invested over $1.7 billion and poured 180,000 cubic yards, that is a lot of concrete, to build 108 miles of powerful border wall. I know who is going to vote for me. I do not know though, I think I am going to win Yuma. What do you think, Doug? I think, when I hear those numbers, when we hear those numbers, we are winning. We are going to win Yuma big. No, you see it and you see what is going up and it is an incredible structure, all capable, all wired up for cameras, for everything you can have. In total, I have already completely planned for the final execution, we are going to have, by the end of the year, everything that we said is going to be built. We may actually build some more in some soft areas that we have noticed over the last two years. So, we actually may put up some additional, but we will have it completed, everything we said, by the end of the year and nobody thought that was possible. And we have reduced illegal border crossings by 60% since this time last year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5362, "text": "And if we keep going at the rate, it'll be about 85% in about two months. Your community is much safer, you see the difference, it is a much safer place to be. But more important than these numbers is the fact that we have ended catch and release. These great men and women catch somebody, maybe a murderer, maybe a rapist, maybe a trafficker, they catch somebody, take his name, take his number and they release them into our country. And they say, Come back in four years, you have a trial. We take them out. We bring them out. And nobody said that was possible because I could not have gotten it through the Democrats because they do not like that. So, we have people coming into this country, some great people, some really bad people too. When we bring them back to their country, could be Mexico also, they do not come back. Under the Obama Biden, I call it OBiden, Under the OBiden administration, our agents were ordered to ignore the law and release illegal aliens by the hundreds of thousands. And by the way, Mark Morgan, where is the great Mark Morgan? Mark Morgan has been so incredible, one of our executives, he said, We never built the cages. Those cages were built in 2014 by Obama. We never the cages, they were built by Obama and the fake news is constantly saying that I built cages for children. I did not build them. They were built in 2014. There was a headline in Time magazine about the cage and somebody called in that built it. They said, He did not build it, we built that for the Obama administration. But they do not stop, they keep calling it, they say I built cages. You will hear it in one of the debates. They will say, You build cages ENTITY. I said, No, I did not build cages. That was built by Obama. Under the Trump administration, if you cross our border illegally, you are quickly apprehended and swiftly returned back home. We are proudly defending the job safety and security of the American people, which is what I promised to do. Nobody told me it was going to be this hard. Nobody told me I was going to have the Democrats go totally crazy. This was like a life and death war. You know why they do not talk about it anymore? Because they know it is bad politics, because they know having a wall, they cannot win that one.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5363, "text": "They do not want to talk about it. That includes the millions of incredible Hispanic Americans who follow our laws, uplift our community--and protect our nation, in uniform. Half of all border patrol agents are Hispanic Americans; I was just with them. And today I salute each and every one of those true American heroes and that is what they are. And you know nobody understands the border better than Hispanics. They do not want bad people coming into our country, taking their jobs, taking their homes, causing crime. Hispanic Americans are the people that are most in favor of what we are doing on the border because they understand it. They understand it better than anybody. With the help of these patriots, we have stopped the rampant asylum fraud, shut down the human smugglers and we are finding the drug dealers, traffickers, predators, and we are throwing them the hell in jail or sending them back home. MS-13 for the first time that you have ever seen this, MS-13 is totally on the run. Many of its leaders are right now behind bars and we are deporting its members in record numbers we have never reported. But if Biden wins, it will be a giant jail break for MS-13 and vicious criminal gangs. When we win, I will have a deal with Iran within a month, watch, because they are dying to make a deal. But that last hope that Biden will win, they will own our country, China, they will own our country. We made such a great deal. You know, last week they had the largest order of corn in the history of our country, the largest single order. Then they did it again. You know why they are doing that? We made a great trade deal, but I do not care. But it shows you how smart they are, Doug. Another with normal, normal brain power, they'd say, Well, I am not going to buy any more corn. And we will just decouple, thank you very much. But they go the opposite. They buy so much, good record numbers, soybeans record numbers. Last week, biggest ever, 42% of our farmers crop is now China, over the last little while. When I have every farmer in the country calling and saying, Please do not do anything. They are very, very smart, but we can never forget what China did to this country and did to the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5364, "text": "The historic achievements that I have discussed today are only a slim fraction of the extraordinary accomplishment that we have all done together in the last four years. Here is just a short list of our landmarks. We instituted a national security travel ban on the world's most dangerous regions, including jihadist regions, keeping terrorists and extremists out of our country. We won the travel ban. The fake news said we did not because we lost in the lower court, we lost in the second court, and we won in the Supreme court. Can you believe it? They said we lost Debbie, because we lost the first two, but we won in the Supreme court, so they said, They lost. But we have it. We have a great travel ban now for countries that are not countries where we do not want the people coming in. Over the last three years, ICE officers have made over 380,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records, including those charged or convicted of over 145,000 assaults, 40,000 sex crimes and 5,800 murders. Over the last three years, border patrol and ICE have seized over two million pounds of fentanyl, heroin, meth, and other deadly narcotics. And you see it all the time. We stripped federal grant funding from deadly sanctuary cities. They want to have a sanctuary city, not going to be like the old days. We canceled the lawless policies of the previous administration and empowered border agents and ICE officers to do their jobs and proudly enforce the laws of the United States of America. We removed 20,000 gang members, including 4,500, MS-13. I entered into three landmark agreements with Honduras and El Salvador and Guatemala to end the abuse of the asylum system. We cut down that payment that I was talking about substantially and they are still very happy and they are working with us very well and that includes Mexico. Right now, Mexico has 27,000 of their soldiers on our Southern border, helping us to guard our Southern border. And we are giving you the tools to do the job that you signed up for. That is what we have done. I entered into a historic partnership with Mexico, known as the migrant protection protocols, to safely return asylum seekers to Mexico, while awaiting hearings in the United States. You know about that. We had to have them in the United States and we captured them, we had to keep him here. I said, No, no, we do not want them here. We want them outside.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5365, "text": "We got sued all over the place and we won. So now they do not come into the United States, they can wait outside. For the first time ever, the United States is now exercising our full legal authority to expedited removal. We do not have to go through years and years of litigation. We ended the Obama Biden policy of giving work permits to newly arriving, illegal aliens. We established the national vetting center, the most advanced visa screening system, anywhere in the world. We know so much about the people coming in. We know the good and we know the bad. We have suspended refugee resettlements from the world's most dangerous regions, because nothing is more important than keeping America safe. To me, that is number one. We have made historic progress to crack down on visa overstays. You know all about that. They overstay for years. Well, five years later, you catch them. Nope, we ended it. We issued strict sanctions on countries that failed to take back their own criminals. We have many countries beyond the four that I mentioned, the three plus one, many countries. They all take them back now. Before, they were not taking them back at all. The last administration simply released these criminals. We do not want them. We issued regulations to stop the horrible practice of birth tourism. Anchor babies, you know that, right? Have a baby in our country and you stay for the rest of your life. You are a citizen for 90 years. And then you bring in your family. You bring in your family, right? I implemented a historic public charge regulation to finally and fully enforce the federal requirement that newcomers to our country must be financially self-sufficient, they cannot accept welfare for at least five years. To protect our country and our agents during the pandemic, my administration took immediate action to ensure the safe and rapid return of all illegal aliens. We brought them back. We have very few in our country now. We brought them back, can you believe it? To protect US workers, I suspended the entry of low wage workers that threatened all of your jobs, American jobs, and we are finalizing the new H-1B regulations to permanently end the displacement of US workers. In January after the China virus, after the outbreak, after the outbreak, the China virus outbreak, it came from Wuhan, right? I swiftly implemented a travel ban on China and I was criticized. Biden opposed the ban.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5366, "text": "He said, I oppose the ban. He had no idea what the hell he was doing. Why do you oppose it, Joe? They told me to say that. If we had listened to Sleepy Joe Biden, hundreds of thousands of additional American lives would have been lost. We did a good thing. That was in January, I imposed it, very early. We imposed it because China was heavily infected. Then I imposed it on Europe also, heavily infected with Italy and France and Spain. Compare our achievements with the insane and lethal policies that Biden and Bernie Sanders want. By the way, you talk about guns. She wants no 2nd Amendment. She wants to raise your taxes to a level you will be paying your government back for a long time. They asked me that. What do you think? They thought I was happy for him. No, I was happy for me. The Biden-Harris plan is a step-by-step recipe for abolishing America's borders. In the Biden-Bernie manifesto, Joe Biden, promises to restore and expand catch and release across the entire US border. You believe that? We just got rid of it. Free all illegal aliens from federal detention and close detention facilities, this would make removing illegal aliens totally impossible, and you would have murderers, killers, rapists in your midst. Immediately suspend all removals, triggering a tidal wave of, really a flood, if you think, a flood all across our border. End prosecution of illegal border crosses ensuring that illegal aliens will repeatedly reenter the country over and over again and terminate all protections we have enacted against asylum fraud. They want to do things that nobody thought was even possible to contemplate. But I will tell you this-it is 120. You know what I said before? Think of yourself at a great spa, great sauna, where it is 120 degrees and we have to pay a lot of money to be there. You have to pay a lot of money. Getting off the border, getting off illegal protection, all of that, we are going to lower your taxes further. We gave you the biggest tax decrease in the history of-the biggest tax decrease in the history of our country. We decreased your taxes more than anybody has ever done and we are doing more because that is going to spell growth and that is what happened. So, we are doing that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5367, "text": "We have cut regulations more than any president in the history of our country, whether it is four years, eight years, or in one case, more. I told you already, our military is the best it is ever been. It is got $2.5 trillion worth of new, beautiful jets and equipment and rockets and everything. And hopefully, we never have to use it. Our nuclear arsenal, and hopefully, hopefully we never have to even look at it, our nuclear arsenal is at a level that it is never ever been before, and we have to have it there, but we never want to use it. So, we have done things not only on the border, the border is one element, and to me it is very important. Something that they always say about a president, the most important thing a president can do is the appointment of federal judges and supreme court justices. So, by the end of our, of not my, our first term, we will have appointed 300 federal judges and appeals court judges--and two supreme court justices. And, when it comes to 2nd Amendment, when it comes to life, when it comes to a lot of things that you people live for, if you do not have the supreme court and if you do not have the courts in your side, you can forget it. The next president, I think, will pick two, three, or even four justices of the supreme court. They can be on the court for 40 to 50 years. You pick them young. They could be on there for 40 to 50 years. This is going to be the most important, and I never thought I'd say it because of what happened four years ago, this is going to be the most important election of your life. We need every single vote that we can get because it is probably going to be close. They have these suppression, the fakers back there, they have these suppression polls where they interview many more Democrats than they do Republicans. Doug and I were talking about it, and they take out registered voters. They say, Most likely to vote voters. That is what, most likely registered, they are dead, they are old, they are not going to go, they are not going to do anything. November 3rd is the biggest date, one of the biggest dates in your life, in many cases, frankly, it is the most important date of your life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyyumaarizona", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Yuma, Arizona", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-yuma-arizona", "publication_date": "18-08-2020", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5368, "text": "Well, it is good to be back in Philadelphia. It is good to be among so many good friends, including Benjamin Franklin, one of my favorite Founders. I have to admit, I had to restrain myself because this is such an amazing facility, and just wandering around, I started reading about all kinds of American history and that the Dead Sea Scrolls were here. Staff was saying, ENTITY, you have some other stuff that you have to do. There are a couple of acknowledgments that I want to make. First of all, you have got one of the best mayors in the country, Mayor Michael Nutter is here. You have got a couple of the finest Members of Congress in Bob Brady and Chaka Fattah. And you have got somebody here who is been one of my dearest friends and one of my favorite people who has always had my back, and he and I share a lot in common. We are both--we both pretend to play basketball, even though we are way too old. We both married up and we both have extraordinary daughters. He happens also to be one of the best Members of the Senate that we have. Bob Casey is in the house. So I am here not just because I need your help, although I do. I am here because the country needs your help. When you think back to 2008, a lot of you were involved in that campaign. You did not get involved because you thought ENTITY was the odds-on favorite to become President of the United States. Let us face it. the idea that if you are willing to work hard, if you are willing to take responsibility, that in this country you can make it; that you can find a job that pays a living wage and you can save and buy a home. You can send your kids to college so they do even better than you did. You can retire with some dignity and some respect. The idea that no matter where you come from, no matter what you look like, no matter what your faith, no matter who you love, that in America you can make it if you try. It is that idea that builds the broadest middle class in the history of the world--and that was and has been the strength of America, the backbone of America--is that everybody had a shot. And we felt back in 2008 that those ideals were being lost, that we had taken a wrong turn.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5369, "text": "We had taken a surplus left behind by President Clinton and turned it into deficits as far as the eye could see, not because we invested in our economic future, but because we gave tax cuts to folks who did not need them and were not even asking for them. We put two wars on a credit card. Our economy increasingly was built on financial speculation and a housing bubble. Manufacturing was leaving our shores. And although a few people were doing really, really well, that broad-based middle class that built this country, that was the essence of this country, found themselves--you found yourselves--in a situation where wages, incomes were flatlining and job growth was the most sluggish it had been in 50, 60 years and the cost of everything from health care to college education kept on going up and up and up. And it all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Three million jobs lost in the 6 months before I took office, while we were campaigning, 800,000 jobs lost the month that I was sworn into office. And so we had to make a series of tough decisions and decisive decisions and quick decisions, and we had to do it without much help from the other side. But the thing that gave me confidence throughout was what I had learned about the American people as I traveled all across the country--and it is a great privilege just running for President and obviously a greater privilege being President because you meet Americans from every walk of life and they show you their grit and they show you their determination. And it turns out Americans are tougher than any tough times. And so when some people said we should let Detroit go bankrupt, we decided, no, we are going to make a bet on the American worker and American industry. And because of the actions that we took, GM is back on top, and we are seeing the auto industry rehiring and producing better cars than ever. We helped to stabilize the financial system so small businesses could get help again and get credit and financing flowing again. Businesses got back to basics, and we created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months, 800,000 this year alone. So we have made progress. And the reason we made progress was in part because of our policies, but in part because Americans everywhere figured out how they were going to respond.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5370, "text": "If you really pay attention--and one of our jobs during this election is to get folks to pay attention to what the other side is actually offering--then it boils down to deeper tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, $5 trillion in tax cuts on top of the Bush tax cuts, an average of a 25-percent tax cut for millionaires all across the country, and the elimination of regulations that would make sure that Wall Street does not engage in the kind of behavior that resulted in this crisis, that would roll back the kinds of progress we have made making sure insurance companies cannot drop you when you get sick, that would roll back environmental and worker protection and consumer protections that we have been working on not just during my administration, but for the last 30, 40 years. That is the essence of what they are offering. And I guess he thinks either it would result in a different outcome than it did when we just tried this 10 years ago, or he and the Republican Congress are counting on the notion that we forgot how it turned out. We are moving forward, and that is why I am running for a second term as President of the United States of America. I am running to make sure that we keep bringing manufacturing and industry back to Philadelphia, back to Pittsburgh, back to Pennsylvania, back to Ohio. I want to stop giving tax breaks for companies that are shipping jobs overseas. I want those tax breaks to go to companies that are investing right here in the United States of America. I am running to make sure that we continue on a path of providing the best education possible for every single one of our children and make sure that we have got the highest rates of college graduates of any country on Earth, because that is going to be the future. We took a student loan program where tens of billions of dollars were being funneled to banks as middlemen in the student loan program, we said, why do not we just give that money directly to students. And as a consequence, we have got millions of students who are benefiting from higher Pell grants; more kids are eligible. We are able to make sure that we can cap the amount of money that folks have to pay back each month on their student loans, because we recognized that a higher education cannot be a luxury. You cannot just count on the fact that your parents are paying for your college education. A lot of kids need help. And that is good for the country. We are not going backwards on that, we are going to keep moving forward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5371, "text": "I am running because I want to continue to see America be the best innovator in the world. When you think about Benjamin Franklin--I just had a chance to talk to these outstanding students from a science and leadership academy who graduated. And I told them, what is America about? We have been about technology and discovery and invention, dating back to this guy. So the notion that we would now shortchange our investments in science and basic research, the possible cures for cancer or Alzheimer's or the clean energy that can make sure that we are doing something about climate change and saving money for families--that is not the answer, rolling back those investments. That is why I am running for President of the United States again. I am running because I want us to continue to build this country. We are a nation of builders. The mayor and I were talking as we were driving from the airport about all the projects, all the infrastructure, all the folks being put back to work making Philadelphia a more attractive place for people to do business. And all across the country, I want us to rebuild our roads and our bridges, our airports. I want us to build broadband lines and high-speed rail and wireless networks so that we have the platform for businesses to succeed all across this country. That is why I am running for President. I want to put people back to work rebuilding America. I am running because I believe in America's energy future. So we have focused on traditional sources of energy, but we have also doubled fuel efficiency standards on cars. We have also doubled the production of clean energy. I want us to control our own energy future, and we can put people back to work in the process. And that is why I am running for President of the United States of America, because I believe we can achieve that. And I am running for President because I want to do something about our debt and our deficits in a balanced and responsible way. And that is as sharp a contrast as we have got between my approach and what Republicans are peddling right now. They think somehow they have got a winner on this issue. Let us talk about the facts here. Remember, when the last Democratic President was in office, we had a surplus. By the time I got into office, we had a $1 trillion deficit because of tax cuts that were not paid for, two wars that were not paid for, a prescription drug plan that was not paid for.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5372, "text": "We had baked into the cake structural deficits that were made even worse by the financial crisis. And so for these folks suddenly to get religion----and say, man, deficits and Government spending--when they ran up the tab and are trying to pass off the bill to me----listen, let me tell you something. Even after you factor in all the work that we did to prevent us from slipping into a depression, the pace of growth of Government spending is lower under my administration than it has been in the last 50 years. The two Presidents with the least growth in Government spending in the modern era happen to be two Democrats named ENTITY and Bill Clinton. And now you have got Mr. Romney proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. either it is not paid for, in which case, that is $5 trillion that is piled on top of the debt we already have, passed onto the next generation, or it is going to come from middle class families all across this country. And I am running for President because we are not going to let that happen. We are not going to allow another millionaires' tax cut to result in cuts in basic research and science, and cuts in Head Start programs, and less help to States and cities who are putting folks back to work. We are not going to have poor and disabled and seniors who rely on Medicaid having to bear the brunt for another millionaires' tax cut. We are not going to voucherize Medicare. We have got to do something about the debt and deficits, and the way to do it is by making sure that, yes, we go after waste in Government. But what we do have to make sure of is that we do it in a balanced way. So, even as we are paring back on things that do not work--and I have already signed $2 trillion of cuts into law already and have proposed $2 trillion in additional deficit reduction--even as we are making sensible cuts, even as we are reforming our health care system to make sure that the dollars we pay actually make us healthier, what we are not going to do is to make the most vulnerable people in our society, as well as the middle class, shoulder the burden. We are going to ask those like myself who are best equipped to help to do their fair share because that is part of the American bargain. Everybody gets a fair shot. Everybody does their fair share. Everybody plays by the same set of rules.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5373, "text": "That is what we mean when we say we are going forward. We are not going to relitigate Wall Street reform. We are not going to relitigate health care reform. It was the right thing to do; 2.5 million young people who can stay on their parent's plan and now have health insurance who did not otherwise have it. Millions of seniors getting discounts on their prescription drugs, that was the right thing to do. Health care prevention and women being able to control their own health care decisions, that was the right thing to do. In 2008, I said I'd end the war in Iraq. I ended it. In 2008, I said we'd go after Al Qaida. And bin Laden is no longer a threat to this country and Al Qaida is on its heels. We are transitioning in Afghanistan, and by 2014, we have set a timeline, that war will be over. And we are going to use the savings that we get from ending these wars. Half of it will go to deficit reduction; the other half, we will put to work rebuilding America, because this is the nation we need to build. That is what I mean when I say we are moving forward. We are not going to go back to the days when you could not serve in the military just because of who you love. Do not ask, do not tell was bad for America's security, and it was wrong, and we believe in the fairness and dignity and equality of all people. We want to move forward and make sure that elections are not just about $10 million checks being written by folks who have vested interests in maintaining the status quo. We want to move forward to make sure that we are creating an immigration system that reflects our tradition as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. Look, we are at our best when every voice is heard, when everybody has a stake. That is a tradition started by folks like Benjamin Franklin. That is the essence of our creed. If you look at our history, when we have made progress we have done it together. That is how my grandfather's generation was educated on a GI bill. That is how we built the Hoover Dam. That is how we sent a man to the Moon. We believe in individual initiative and the free market. We love folks getting rich----that is part of America's success. But we also understand there are some things we do together as a nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5374, "text": "That is the true lesson of our history. And that is the choice that we face in this election. Now, let me tell you, this election is going to be close, because folks have gone through a tough time. And no matter how many times you tell them, well, we avoided a whole bunch of really bad stuff, if you do not have a job, if your house is still underwater, if you have not seen your income go up in a decade, you are still frustrated. You are still concerned about your kid's future. And the other side, they do not have any new ideas. I am telling you, I want you all to pay attention over the next 5 months and see if they are offering a single thing that they did not try when they were in charge, because you will not see it. But you know what they do have is they will have $500 million worth of negative ads. And they will tap into and feed into cynicism and a sense of frustration. And they will try to direct blame. The thing is, though, what you guys taught me in 2008 was when Americans, when citizens decide to come together, when they say, it is time for change, when they start talking to their neighbors and their friends and they are really starting to pay attention in terms of who is saying what and asking themselves, how do we move this country forward, when you decide change needs to happen, guess what, it happens. And so I have never been more convinced about the strength and the dignity of the American people. I have never been more convinced about our prospects for the future, and the reason is because of you. As I travel all across this country, the American people constantly give me hope. They constantly give me cause for optimism. I still believe in you. And I told you back in 2008 that I would not be--I was not a perfect man. Michelle would tell you that. And I would not --I'd never be a perfect President, but I did say I'd always tell you what I thought and I'd always tell you where I stood. And I promised you I would wake up every single day thinking about how I can work as hard as I know how, to make your lives a little bit better and to make the lives of future generations a little bit better. I have kept that promise. And so I hope you still believe in me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-philadelphia", "publication_date": "12-06-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5383, "text": "Laura and I are so honored that, Klaus, you gave us a chance to come. I do want to thank President Mubarak and Mrs. Mubarak for their wonderful hospitality. I want to thank the Members of Congress who are here. I appreciate the heads of state who've joined us. I thank the foreign ministers who are here, including my own, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. And I want to thank the members of the diplomatic corps. Laura and I are delighted to be in Egypt, and we bring the warm wishes of the American people. We are proud of our long friendship with your citizens. We respect your remarkable history. And we are humbled to walk in the ancient land of pharaohs, where a great civilization took root and wrote some of the first chapters in the epic story of humanity. America is a much younger nation, but we have made our mark by advancing ideals as old as the pyramids. Those ideals of liberty and justice have sparked a revolution across much of the world. This hopeful movement made its way to places where dictators once reigned and peaceful democracies seemed unimaginable, places like Chile and Indonesia and Poland and the Philippines and South Korea. These nations have different histories and different traditions, yet each made the same democratic transition, and they did it on their own terms. In these countries, millions every year are rising from poverty. Women are realizing overdue opportunities. And people of faith are finding the blessing of worshiping God in peace. All these changes took place in the second half of the 20th century. I strongly believe that if leaders, like those of you in this room, act with vision and resolve, the first half of the 21st century can be the time when similar advances reach the Middle East. This region is home to energetic people, a powerful spirit of enterprise, and tremendous resources. It is capable of a very bright future, a future in which the Middle East is a place of innovation and discovery driven by free men and women. In recent years, we have seen hopeful beginnings toward this vision. Turkey, a nation with a majority Muslim population, is a prosperous, modern democracy. Afghanistan, under the leadership of President Karzai, is overcoming the Taliban and building a free society. Iraq, under the leadership of Prime Minister Maliki, is establishing a multiethnic democracy. We have seen the stirrings of reform from Morocco and Algeria to Jordan and the Gulf States. the cell phone and the Internet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5384, "text": "America appreciates the challenges facing the Middle East, yet the light of liberty is beginning to shine. From diversifying your economies to investing in your people to extending the reach of freedom, nations across the region have an opportunity to move forward with bold and confident reforms and to lead the Middle East to its rightful place as a center of progress and achievement. This is a time of strength for many of your nations' economies. Since 2004, economic growth in the region has averaged more than 5 percent. And unemployment rates have decreased in many nations. Egypt, for example, has posted strong economic growth, developed some of the world's fastest growing telecommunications companies, and made major investments that will boost tourism and trade. In order for this economic progress to result in permanent prosperity and an Egypt that reaches its full potential, however, economic reform must be accompanied by political reform. And I continue to hope that Egypt can lead the region in political reform. This is also a time to prepare for the economic changes ahead. Rising price of oil has brought great wealth to some in this region, but the supply of oil is limited, and nations like mine are aggressively developing alternatives to oil. Over time, as the world becomes less dependent on oil, nations in the Middle East will have to build more diverse and more dynamic economies. Your greatest asset in this quest is the entrepreneurial spirit of your people. The best way to take advantage of that spirit is to make reforms that unleash individual creativity and innovation. Your economies will be more vibrant when citizens who dream of starting their own companies can do so quickly, without high regulatory and registration costs. Your economies will be more dynamic when property rights are protected and risk-taking is encouraged, not punished, by law. Your economies will be more resilient when you adopt modern agricultural techniques that make farmers more productive and the food supply more secure. And your economies will have greater long-term prosperity when taxes are low and all your citizens know that their innovation and hard work will be rewarded. One of the most powerful drivers of economic growth is free trade. So nations in this region would benefit greatly from breaking down barriers to trade with each other. And America will continue working to open up trade at every level. In recent years, the United States has completed free trade agreements with Jordan, Oman, Morocco, and Bahrain. America will continue to negotiate bilateral free trade agreements in the region.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5385, "text": "We strongly supported Saudi Arabia's accession to the World Trade Organization, and we will continue to support nations making the reforms necessary to join the institutions of a global economy. And to break down trade barriers and ignite economic growth around the world, we will work tirelessly for a successful outcome to the Doha round this year. As we seek to open up new markets abroad, America will keep our markets open at home. There are voices in my country that urge America to adopt measures that would isolate us from the global economy. I firmly reject these calls for protectionism. We will continue to welcome foreign investment and trade. And the United States of America will stay open for business. Some analysts believe the Middle East and North Africa will need to create up to 100 million new jobs over the next 10 to 15 years just to keep up with population growth. The key to realizing this goal is an educated workforce. This starts early on, with primary schools that teach basic skills such as reading and math rather than indoctrinating children with ideologies of hatred. An educated workforce also requires good high schools and universities where students are exposed to a variety of ideas, learn to think for themselves, and develop the capacity to innovate. Not long ago, the region marked a hopeful milestone in higher education. In our meeting yesterday, President Karzai told me he recently handed out diplomas to university graduates, including 300 degrees in medicine and 100 degrees in engineering and a lot of degrees to lawyers. And many of the recipients were women. The people of the Middle East can count on the United States to be a strong partner in improving your educational systems. We are sponsoring training programs for teachers and administrators in nations like Jordan and Morocco and Lebanon. We sponsored English language programs where students can go for intensive language instruction. We have translated more than 80 children's books into Arabic. We have developed new online curricula for students from kindergarten through high school. It is also in America's interest to continue welcoming aspiring young adults from this region for higher education to the United States. My administration has worked hard to improve the visa process. And I am pleased to report that we are issuing a growing number of student visas to young people from the Middle East.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5386, "text": "And we will continue to work to expand educational exchanges, because we benefit from the contribution of foreign students who study in America, because we are proud to train the world's leaders of tomorrow, and because we know there is no better antidote to the propaganda of our enemies than firsthand experience with life in the United States of America. This is a matter of morality and of basic math. No nation that cuts off half its population from opportunities will be as productive or prosperous as it could be. Women are a formidable force, as I have seen in my own family and my own administration. As the nations of the Middle East open up their laws and their societies to women, they are learning the same thing. I applaud Egypt. Egypt is a model for the development of professional women. In Afghanistan, girls who were once denied even a basic education are now going to school, and a whole generation of Afghans will grow up with the intellectual tools to lead their nation toward prosperity. In Iraq and in Kuwait, women are joining political parties and running campaigns and serving in public office. In some Gulf States, women entrepreneurs are making a living and a name for themselves in the business world. Recently, I learned of a woman in Bahrain who owns her own shipping company. She started with a small office and two employees. When she first tried to register her business in her own name, she was turned down. She attended a business training class and was the only woman to participate. And when she applied for a customs license, officials expressed surprise because no woman had ever asked for one before. And yet with hard work and determination, she turned her small company into a $2 million enterprise. And this year, Huda Janahi was named one of the 50 most powerful businesswomen in the Arab world. Huda is an inspiring example for the whole region. You have a great deal to contribute; you should have a strong voice in leading your countries; and my Nation looks to the day when you have the rights and privileges you deserve. Free societies stimulate competition in the marketplace. Free societies give people access to information they need to make informed and responsible decisions. And free societies give citizens the rule of law, which exposes corruption and builds confidence in the future. Freedom is also the basis for a democratic system of government, which is the only fair and just ordering of society and the only way to guarantee the God-given rights of all people. Democracies do not take the same shape.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5387, "text": "They develop at different speeds and in different ways, and they reflect the unique cultures and traditions of their people. I understand that. But as more people in the Middle East gain firsthand experience from freedom, many of the arguments against democracy are being discredited. For example, some say that democracy is a Western value that America seeks to impose on unwilling citizens. This is a condescending form of moral relativism. The truth is that freedom is a universal right, the Almighty's gift to every man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth. And as we have seen time and time again, when people are allowed to make a choice between freedom and the alternative, they choose freedom. In Afghanistan, 8 million people defied the terrorist threats to vote for a democratic President. In Iraq, 12 million people waved ink-stained fingers to celebrate the first democratic election in decades. There are people who claim that democracy is incompatible with Islam. But the truth is that democracies, by definition, make a place for people of religious belief. America is one of the most is one of the world's leading democracies, and we are also one of the most religious nations in the world. More than three-quarters of our citizens believe in a higher power. Millions worship every week and pray every day, and they do so without fear of reprisal from the state. In our democracy, we would never punish a person for owning a Koran. We would never issue a death sentence to someone for converting to Islam. Democracy does not threaten Islam or any religion. Democracy is the only system of government that guarantees their protection. Some say any state that holds an election is a democracy. But true democracy requires vigorous political parties allowed to engage in free and lively debate. True democracy requires the establishment of civic institutions that ensure an election's legitimacy and hold leaders accountable. And true democracy requires competitive elections in which opposition candidates are allowed to campaign without fear or intimidation. Too often in the Middle East, politics has consisted of one leader in power and the opposition in jail. America is deeply concerned about the plight of political prisoners in this region as well as democratic activists who are intimidated or repressed, newspapers and civil society organizations that are shut down, and dissidents whose voices are stifled. The time has come for nations across the Middle East to abandon these practices and treat their people with dignity and the respect they deserve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5388, "text": "I call on all nations to release their prisoners of conscience, open up their political debate, and trust their people to chart their future. The vision I have outlined today is shared by many in this region, but unfortunately, there are some spoilers who stand in the way. Terrorist organizations and their state sponsors know they cannot survive in a free society, so they create chaos and take innocent lives in an effort to stop democracy from taking root. They are on the wrong side in a great ideological struggle, and every nation committed to freedom and progress in the Middle East must stand together to defeat them. We must stand with the Palestinian people, who have suffered for decades and earned the right to be a homeland of their own to have a homeland of their own. I strongly support a two-state solution, a democratic Palestine based on law and justice that will live with peace and security alongside a democrat Israel. I believe that the Palestinian people will build a thriving democracy in which entrepreneurs pursue their dreams, and families own their homes in lively communities, and young people grow up with hope in the future. Last year at Annapolis, we made a hopeful beginning toward a peace negotiation that will outline what this nation of Palestine will look like, a contiguous state where Palestinians live in prosperity and dignity. A peace agreement is in the Palestinians' interests, it is in Israel's interests, it is in Arab States' interests, and it is in the world's interests. And I firmly believe that with leadership and courage, we can reach that peace agreement this year. It requires action on all sides. Palestinians must fight terror and continue to build the institutions of a free and peaceful society. Israel must make tough sacrifices for peace and ease the restrictions on the Palestinians. Arab States, especially oil-rich nations, must seize this opportunity to invest aggressively in the Palestinian people and to move past their old resentments against Israel. And all nations in the region must stand together in confronting Hamas, which is attempting to undermine efforts at peace with acts of terror and violence. We must stand with the people of Lebanon in their struggle to build a sovereign and independent democracy. This means opposing Hizballah terrorists, funded by Iran, who recently revealed their true intentions by taking up arms against the Lebanese people. It is now clearer than ever that Hizballah militias are the enemy of a free Lebanon. And all nations, especially neighbors in the region, have an interest to help the Lebanese people prevail.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5389, "text": "We must stand with the people of Iraq and Afghanistan and other nations in the region fighting against Al Qaida and other extremists. Bin Laden and his followers have made clear that anyone who does not share their extremist ideology is fit for murder. That means every government in the Middle East is a target of Al Qaida. And together, we will confront and we will defeat this threat to civilization. We must stand with the good and decent people of Iran and Syria, who deserve so much better than the life they have today. Every peaceful nation in the region has an interest in stopping these nations from supporting terrorism. And every peaceful nation in the region has an interest in opposing Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions. To allow the world's leading sponsor of terror to gain the world's deadliest weapon would be an unforgivable betrayal of future generations. For the sake of peace, the world must not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. demographics. Sixty percent of the population is under 30 years old. Many of these young people surf the Web, own cell phones, have satellite televisions. They have access to unprecedented amounts of information. They see what freedom has brought to millions of others and contrast that to what they have at home. Today I have a message for these young people. Some tell you some will tell you change is impossible, but history has a way of surprising us, and change can happen more quickly than we expect. in Arabic, hurriyya; in English, freedom. Across the world, the call for freedom lives in our hearts, endures in our prayers, and joins humanity as one. I know these are trying times, but the future is in your hands, and freedom and peace are within your grasp. Just imagine what this region could look like in 60 years. a democratic state that is governed by law, respects human rights, and rejects terror. Israel will be celebrating its 120th anniversary as one of the world's great democracies, a secure and flourishing homeland for the Jewish people. From Cairo, Riyadh, Baghdad to Beirut, people will live in free and independent societies, where a desire for peace is reinforced by ties of diplomacy and tourism and trade. Iran and Syria will be peaceful nations, where today's oppression is a distant memory and people are free to speak their minds and develop their talents.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheworldeconomicforumsharmelsheikh", "title": "George W. Bush Remarks to the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-world-economic-forum-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-07-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5390, "text": "We love being with you. We love being with you. And I am thrilled to be here in Albuquerque with thousands of hard-working, freedom-loving American patriots. We are all united by the same love of our great country. And by the way, our country is doing great. You see it. The same devotion to family and the same profound faith that America is blessed by, the eternal grace of Almighty God. Tomorrow they will say, Massive protest. No, one person just going home to mommy a little bit sooner. But we are bound by these convictions. We will campaign for every vote, and we will win the great state of New Mexico in 2020. And by the way, you have thousands and thousands of people outside who cannot get in. So we love you, we love you, we appreciate it. We try to get the biggest arena we can get, and they are never big enough, frankly. But right now it is like a great tree or a great plant, you plant it and it has to take hold. We have to win 2020. We have to win 2020. And every day, and you know as well as I do, we are battling against the corrupt establishment of the past, and we are achieving historic victories for the American people. Crucially for your state, we have ended the last administration's war on American energy. And since my election, natural gas productions, big story today, in New Mexico has increased by 40%, 4-0. And that means great wages, and it means jobs. And that is why you are breaking every single record in your state's book. Crude oil production in New Mexico has more than doubled, and going up a lot higher very quickly. And your state's energy revenues are up by nearly two-thirds. And that is in a short period of time. The United States is now the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world. And this means more jobs, higher wages, and American energy independence, which is what we have. A few years ago, if we had a problem like you saw two days ago in the Middle East, we would've been in a panic. But a few years ago, they would have been in a panic. Today we got a lot of oil, we got a lot of gas. We got a lot of oil and gas. We do not have to send too many boats over there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5391, "text": "Did you notice the other day, they were saying, We do not see too many American ships anymore. And we are now a net exporter of energy. Revenues from energy production provide up to 25% of your state's budget and going much higher in the very near future. And they have generated nearly a billion-dollar budget surplus in New Mexico. Now, under the Green New Deal, that all goes away. You can forget it. You are not allowed to travel more than 162 miles. They will call us the hermit nation. We will never leave our house. I do not want to bring it up because I do not want to do it too early. But think of it for you, and for Texas, and for so many other places, they want to get rid of your energy. I mean, explain that one. Yet, every major Democrat running for president, they want to abolish all production of oil and natural gas. In other words, the Democrats want to completely annihilate New Mexico's economy. The Democrats want us to be subservient to foreign producers. They want us to be at the mercy of rogue regimes. But Democrats will never get the chance because New Mexico will never give them that chance. Under this administration, America is working again. And America is respected again, like it has not been for a long time. And I can tell you because I meet so many of the leaders, and their presidents, and their kings, and their queens, and their prime ministers, and their everything, dictators every once in a while. Every once in a while, you get an a rogue dictator. And I will tell you, they always start off, today I had the Crown Prince of Bahrain, and they come in and they say, Sir, I'd like to congratulate you on what you have done with the economy of the United States. It is a model for the entire world. They all say it. And earlier today Do we have any baseball fans? You know what I am going to say. But earlier today in the White House, I had the honor of awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom, that is the highest civilian award, to someone who truly embodies the American dream, baseball legend, the greatest, by the way, the greatest relief pitcher of all time, you look at those records, Mariano Rivera. The Yankees won a lot of World Series because of Mariano. We gave him the medal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5392, "text": "It was a beautiful day at the White House, so it was good. My administration is fighting to empower all Americans to reach their dreams and achieve their potential. We have created six million new jobs since election day. The fake news would never have allowed us to say that during the campaign, even as a projection. Unemployment recently reached its lowest rate in over 50 years. More than seven million Americans have been lifted off of food stamps. Nearly 600,000 Americans came into the labor force last month alone. Wages in your state, New Mexico, are growing at a rate of much more than 3% a year, which is unheard of 20 years ago. And I used to say during the campaign, you go back, it is hard to believe, I am here almost three years Can you believe how time is flying? Can you believe it? I do not know about it me, but you look all much better than you did three years ago. And even with the Me Too movement, we cannot say this, but I will say it anyway, you are better looking, including the men, including the men. Since my election, the number of new business applications for New Mexico has increased by almost 30%, more than any state in the United States. So essentially, that is saying you are in a certain category, which is a very important category, you are doing better than any state in the United States. How do I lose New Mexico? How do we lose that one? And yet, for whatever reason, it is been quite a while since a Republican won this state. But we are going to win this state. And I think we are going to win this state easy. You had to see the people all the way in from the airport. That was a long drive by the way, 35 minutes. But all the way in, we had people, and they were waving. And I did not see any negative hand gesture, right? And we are here for a number of reasons, but we are here because we really think we are going to turn this state and make it a Republican state. Yesterday marked the beginning of the Hispanic Heritage Month. But we have much to celebrate. Unbelievable when you think, the unemployment for Hispanic-Americans is right now at the lowest level ever recorded in the history of our country. Hispanic-American poverty reached a brand new all-time low in history.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5393, "text": "And after years of stagnation that you know very well, wages for Hispanic-Americans are rising really fast, up nearly 8% since my election. And median income, think of that, median income for Hispanic-Americans surpassed $50,000 for the first time ever. And I just want to tell you it is an honor. But when I am on the debate stage debating one of these far left radical Democrats, whoever it may be, and they start telling you what they are going to do for you, and you say, But we have the best numbers, every category, that we have ever had. Hispanic-Americans excuse me, New Mexico as a whole, we have the best numbers. African-Americans, the best numbers that we have ever had in the history of our country. Asian-Americans, the best numbers that we have ever had in history. Women, the best numbers that we have had in 71 years. We are working night and day to deliver a future of limitless opportunity for our nation's Hispanic-American citizens, including millions and millions of extraordinary Mexican-Americans who enrich our society, strengthen our country, serve in our military, and contribute immensely to our shared American family. And I want to just tell you that Mexico is doing a great job for us on the border, and I want to thank the president of Mexico. You know, it is very interesting, I hear everybody screaming, well, you know we are building the wall, and it is going up, and it is going up fast. And if you think that is easy with the Democrats who control the House, we have to take it back, but if you think it is easy But we are building a lot of wall. We will have almost 500 miles of wall built by the end the next year, and it is making a big difference. But you know we won a big case two months ago in the Supreme Court that allowed us to do what we are doing. This has been I will tell you what. So we are building the wall, the ENTITY Corps of Engineers, we are doing a beautiful job. You are going to have to really want to get over that wall, to do it. But it was very interesting because, not too long ago, I saw where the Hispanic-American, the Hispanics, were up with me in a poll, 17%.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5394, "text": "I will not even tell you what the final number was because they will not believe it, but you are going to see what the final number Because the Hispanic-Americans, they understand, they do not want criminals coming across the border. They do not want people taking their jobs. They want to have that security, and they want the wall. They want the wall. And we have a man in the audience who is, I think, the best dressed man in this entire place, including me, right here. And he is been to a couple of rallies too, have not you? We have some people, a group of people the other day, you know, we had a victory in North Carolina that was unbelievable. One of them, it was going to be very, very close. Here is another one of my friends. I like that beautiful red tie you are wearing. But we had a victory, two victories, North Carolina, where one was 17 points down three weeks ago, we got involved, we started sending out lots of different social media messages, we did a couple of little robo calls, but the big thing, we did a speech the night before. The turnout was beyond belief. And instead of being down by 17 points, he easily won the election 4,000 or 5,000 votes. And Greg Murphy was up a couple of points, and he ended up winning, I do not know, I'd ask the media, but they will not give me how many What did he get? He won by a lot. He won by a lot. I'd asked them, but we are not going to get a straight answer. I will tell you, Tuesday night, the fake news was not happy. CNN had their A- list talent. They do not have A-list talent, but they had the best they could have. This was going to be the end of ENTITY, because this man was going to lose. And in all fairness, I helped a lot too. And toward the end of the night, they started dismantling that studio. Probably it would have been there for four weeks. But we had two great victories, congressional victories, on Tuesday night. The one gentleman won by a number that nobody thought even possible, so much. And the other won a race that he was way, way, way back.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5395, "text": "In fact, I should not tell you this, but my geniuses, my people, some of those people standing right there, right there, some of them right there, they said, Sir, do not get involved in that race, sir. You cannot come back from 17 points, sir. I said, But you know, I really like the guy. Let us give it a shot. I said, Let me tell you, I know them very well. Whether I help him or do not help him, it is going to be the same. So let us help him. They said, Do not do it, sir. We are also very proud that unemployment among Native Americans has reached the lowest rate in nearly two decades. And we are building an amazing future for citizens of every background, race, religion, color, and creed. And that is what we have. That is what we have. But the radical left Democrats want to demolish everything that we have gained. They want to raise your taxes. They want to bury you in regulation. They want to take away your health insurance, 180 million Americans. They want to erase American history, crush religious liberty, indoctrinate our students with left-wing ideology. And left-wing Democrats want to confiscate your guns and eliminate your God-given right to self-defense. You know that. As your president, I will never allow them to take away your liberty, your dignity, and your social security. And I will never, ever allow them to take away your sacred right to keep and bear arms. The left tries to threaten, bully, intimidate Americans into submission. They use Democrat prosecutors and phony congressional committees whenever they can. They will do whatever they can to demean you, to libel you. They try to blacklist, coerce, cancel, or destroy anyone who gets in their way. Look at what they are doing today to Justice Kavanaugh. Look at what they are doing. Did you see the New York Times? Did you see what they are doing? Did you see what Democrats, they are calling for his resignation. They are calling for his impeachment. And the woman involved said she did not know anything. But they still, so the New York Times had to put out a major apology, and they had to change their story. The woman said, I do not remember that. And I just put out a statement.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5396, "text": "And he is a great man, by the way, a great talent. and I just put out a statement on social media that said, I do not think they will do it, but they should, for the good of the nation, I call for the resignation of everybody at the New York Times involved in the Kavanaugh smear story. And while you are at it, the Russian witch-hunt hoax, which is just as phony a story. They have taken, the old gray lady, do you know the New York Times, for years, the old gray lady, so prestigious, they have taken the old great lady and broken her down, destroyed her virtue, and ruined her reputation. She can never recover, and will never return to greatness under current management. And I do want it to live, but they have to be, they have to change their ways. Think of it, they wrote a story about somebody that said she does not remember this. Can you even believe it? And yet, all of these radical left crazies are in judiciary committee and all of these committees that are set up to hurt the country. With all that we have going, with Saudi Arabia, with Iran, with China trade deal, with Russia, with North Korea, with all that we have going, look at the cards that we have been dealt, lucky we won the election in 2016, believe me. With all that we have going, they say, Let us impeach Justice Kavanaugh, one of the smartest, most brilliant students, top at Yale, incredible life, incredible family. Let us impeach him. Let us impeach President ENTITY. This crazy Mueller Report comes out, 18 ENTITY haters, liberal Democrats, some worked for Hillary Clinton, they found nothing. After two years, they found nothing. They spent $40 million. There is not a person in the room that I could not find something on with that. They spent, think of it, they found nothing. To stop the far left's campaign of destruction, you must vote Republican. And you are going to get the chance very soon. We are joined tonight by many terrific Republican leaders, and somebody that is done an incredible job, she ran Michigan for me. And as you know, for the presidential races, Michigan had not been won in decades, and she kept saying, Could you come back, sir? I said, Who the heck is the woman in Michigan that keeps asking?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5397, "text": "She said, Sir, if you keep coming back, you are going to win Michigan. And I won Michigan. ENTITY has won the great state of Michigan. And they were going crazy on television. Going crazy on television. They were going, that was not a good night for certain people. Remember the couple of people that were crying? I guess they do not like a strong military. They do not like cutting regulations. They do not like low taxes. They do not like Right to Try, you know Right to Try. For the Vets, we got choice. We got choice for the Vets. We have rebuilt our military. I told this story for the first time today. A general came into my office in my first few weeks, you remember? President Obama left us with a few beauties, right? And I said to this general, You better be prepared, because this is looking like it could really be conflict. And he looked at me and he goes, Sir, we have very little ammunition. I said, Say it again. And I want to tell you the words, very little, he did not use because it was less than that. And I said, I never want to see a president in a position like that, where we may have conflict, and a general looks at him and said, 'We have very little/ no ammunition.' I never want a president of the United States to be in that position. And since then, three years, $700 billion we have spent, then $716 billion. And our military is by far the greatest in the world. So anyway, no president should ever be put in that position. And by the way, no president should ever have to go through what I have gone through either. What happened is a disgrace to our country. No president should ever have to go through it. And I will tell you what, 99% of them would never have been able to take it. They would not have been able to take it. But we won the great state of Michigan, and now we are doing really well, because we have moved a lot of car companies. I tell Japan, sorry, big deficits with all these countries, we are changing it, but you have got to get car companies. We are building car companies now in Michigan. They are not going to be leaving for lots of other countries, including China, including Mexico.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5398, "text": "They are going to stay home, and they are going to pay you a lot of money, and everybody's going to be happy. And Ronna McDaniel was the Republican Party chair of Michigan. So when we won the election, I said, Let us get the woman from Michigan to run the RNC. And she has done an incredible job. A great gentleman who loves the Republican Party, co-chairman, Tommy Hicks. My friend and a really talented guy, he just gets the hell knocked out of him all the time. What a job he is doing, Brad. And another great friend of mine, somebody that was on CNN, and they did not like him because he was too positive on ENTITY. Can you believe it? He happens to be Hispanic, but I have never quite figured it out, because he looks more like a wasp than I do. So I have not figured that one out. But I will tell you what. There is nobody that loves his country more or Hispanic more than Steve Cortez, Steve. Nobody loves the Hispanics more. Who do you like more, the country or the Hispanics? He says the country. I may have to go for the Hispanics to be honest. We got a lot of Hispanics. We love our Hispanics. You know, just before the last election, the Cubans from Miami where we got a tremendous percentage of the vote, close to 90%. they gave me the Bay of Pigs award. And the Venezuelans and the Cubans are all for ENTITY, I will tell you that. They are all for ENTITY. They like what we are doing. With the help of, and Steve, I want to thank you very much by the way, and you were incredible on CNN, and now you will get a real job. Steve, that audience was not big enough for you. With the help of everyone here tonight, we are taking power out of Washington and giving it back to the great people of our country, and to the people of New Mexico. We have cut a record number of job-killing regulations, saving the average American household $3,000. We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history. What that means is a typical family of four in New Mexico making $75,000 has seen their tax bill reduced by more than $2,000.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5399, "text": "And it is one of the reasons that as the world is not doing great, you look at Europe, and you look at Asia, and China's not doing too well. I must be honest with you, worst year in 57 years, I'd say that is not good. But I hope they still like me. And we have taken in tens of billions of dollars worth of tariffs, and we have given those tariffs, and by the way, China's eating the tariffs, they are devaluing their currency, the prices are very similar. They are eating the tariffs. And out of the tens of billions we gave our great farmers, because they were targeted by China, because China knows, very smart, that the farmers love ENTITY, and ENTITY loves the farmers. I said to our Secretary of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue, I said, Sonny, how much did the farmers get hit by China targeting them and pulling back and doing all sorts of things? He said, $16 billion. We will take $16 billion out of a much, much, much larger number. We are going to give it to the farmers, so that they are even. And I tell you, the farmers do love ENTITY, they do love ENTITY. And to keep New Mexico's farms, ranches, and small businesses in the family, we eliminated the unfair estate tax or death tax, so that you can now give your farm or your ranch to your children. Now, if you do not like your children, do not do it. But when it is your time to kick the bucket, you worked hard. You have great kids, you love your kids, they are taking care of you. You really love them. If you do not love them, do not even listen to the last line, because it will not matter. If they are not good, leave it to charity. I know a guy who cannot stand his children, they are horrible, horrible human beings. He wants to leave his wealth. I said, Why would you leave them? They do not even like you. But on the assumption that you love your children, you will be able to use small farms and your ranches and things. You will be able to leave them to your children. Your children will not have to go out and borrow a fortune to pay tax. They will not be losing it to the banks five years later. We got rid of it. For many decades, our leaders put global interests and special interests ahead of your interests.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5400, "text": "You know that, in New Mexico, you know exactly what I am talking about. People came in, they took your jobs, they had no border, they had no border control. I mean, honestly, I mentioned the president of Mexico. We have today 27,000 Mexican soldiers on the border protecting our country. And I will take it. And the Democrats could change these laws. They could change them so quickly. We could change them all in less than an hour. We could, whether it is asylum, whether it is any of the laws, we have so many of them that are so bad. How they got that, it took years and years to end up. But we have the Mexican soldiers out there. You see them, and they are stopping people. So I just want to thank all of the representatives of Mexico. Well, we have got to get rid of the loopholes. You know, the word is loopholes, and the Democrats could do it fast. But in the meantime, we are doing really well. And as the wall goes up, it becomes less and less of a problem, because as the wall gets up, people are not getting through. It is really doing the trick. The failed liberal establishment in Washington squandered your tax dollars, shipped away your jobs, sacrificed your sovereignty, and bogged us down in one foreign war, or debacle, call it whatever you want after another. And that is changing also, you see what is happening, and when these rich countries think we are going to pay for their military every year, billions and billions and billions, and they are rich, and they take our business and we are supposed to, on top of everything else, I could tell you stories, but I am going to save them for the campaign. Because to be honest, this is a little earlier than the campaign. Wait until this campaign starts, you know, like I was telling Brad and I was telling a few of the folks, one thing I do not want to do, Michael back there, Michael, hello. What a job he is done. But I am telling them I do not want to do this too early. I do not want to do it. You know the Pocahontas thing, I did that, it was before its time. That means I have more Indian blood than she does, and I have none, unfortunately. I'd like to say I have a lot.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5401, "text": "but I was early with her, and frankly, oh it is coming back, do not worry about her. But those days are over under this administration. We are finally putting America first. We are reversing decades of calamitous trade policies that ravished our industries and devastated communities all across our land. You see the factories, empty buildings, empty hulks. Some have been demolished, some have been reconverted into senior citizen housing and housing. But all those jobs are gone, and we are bringing them back. And this is the country where they have the security, and where they do have the action. In my first week in office, I proudly withdrew from the last administration's job-destroying and this was a catastrophe. You know, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, TPP, this would have destroyed the automobile business in our country. Now New Mexico, you know that you were totally devastated by another disaster known as NAFTA. Your state lost 33% of its manufacturing jobs after NAFTA was signed. This was one of the great catastrophes. And now we are replacing NAFTA with the brand new US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, USMCA. And it is drawing strong Bipartisan support from all across your state, and all across the country. the Dona Ana County Board of Commissioners, all Democrats just unanimously endorsed the USMCA, and urged Congress to pass it immediately. Hopefully they will put it up for a vote. Nancy Pelosi, they put it up for vote. The Republicans love it, and the Democrats love it, and frankly, labor loves it. Unions love it. Farmers love, love, love it, and everybody wants it. Your farmers, your ranchers, everybody wants it. And Mexico's already passed it, and Canada's ready to pass it, soon as we do. See, they do not maybe trust us, that is why. They say, Why are not you passing it now? They say, Oh, we will pass it. They are going to pass it as soon as we do. Past leaders invited China to freely loot and pillage the United States economy. China's been taking out from 300 billion to $500 billion a year. We have rebuilt China, but now it is a different ball game. Somebody had to do something with China. President Obama should have done it. Presidents Bush should have done it. President Clinton should have done it. They all should have done it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5402, "text": "Frankly, they all should have done a lot of things that we are doing right now. So if you look at it, nobody did it, so I am doing it, and that is what is going to happen. So now we are taking in billions and billions of dollars from China. When in the past, we never got 25 cents. We never got money. We never got anything. You know what we got? You could do with one less pencil. Following decades of outsourcing and offshoring, our jobs and factories are coming back home where they belong. If foreign companies do not want to pay our tariffs, there is one very simple solution. And by the way, I am just seeing this great group of people, this spirit, is there any place in the world that is more fun or more exciting than a ENTITY rally? When you think about it, it is not about fun. It is about achievement. Because what we have achieved in the last almost three years is unparalleled. There is never been an administration that in the first two and a half years has done what we have been able to do or achieve. In a few short weeks, we will be up to 180, sounds impossible, federal judges including court of appeals judges. Because President Obama did us a great favor when I came in, I said, I assume I have no judges to appoint. No sir, you have 138 judges. Did not put them up, could not get them approved. I do not know what happened, but we started off with 138, now we are up to 180. I just signed my 150th federal judge, and court of appeals judge, and we already have two great Supreme Court justices, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. You know, you come in, and I have always heard the most important thing a president does, I disagree with this by the way, but that is okay. I disagree with a lot of things. Because I think the most important thing is our military, and protecting our country, right? But have you listened to the so-called Washington elite, now why are they elite? We do better than they do, we are smarter than them. We make more money, we have better houses, we have better everything, and then they say the elite. I have always take offense when somebody said, ENTITY is tired of listening to the elite. I said, No, no, I am more elite than them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5403, "text": "I mean, if we go by the old standards, better houses, better schools, made much more money, lived better, had everything going, and then I decide to run for president. And I will be honest, while we have to put up with these people, and others are, it is incredible. I could not be happier, despite what they put us all through. After years of building up other countries, we are finally building up our country. It is time to finally take care of our own. And we are all so aggressively combating the opioid epidemic, which is horrible. And as a result of our nonstop efforts, and billions and billions of dollars invested, last year we saw the first nationwide decline in drug overdose deaths, and it was a very big decline in nearly three decades. And at the center of America's drug crisis, this is where the Hispanics know it better than anybody. People said, Oh, the Hispanics will not like a wall. I said, I think they are going to love it. They will not like border security. I think they going to love it. Because you understand it better than other people, but at the whole center of this crisis is the drugs that are pouring in, and you understand that when other people do not understand it. The border crisis, every day dangerous criminal cartels smuggle vast quantities of lethal narcotics across your Southern border, including heroin, meth, cocaine, and fentanyl, and we are stopping them now. You see the kind of numbers, we are getting millions and millions and millions of dollars worth. We have had some shipments where it could kill half of the country, some of the fentanyl and some of the bad, really bad stuff. If it were distributed, it could actually, has the power to kill half of the country. This is like a warlike situation. That is why you are liking ENTITY, because you are not going to let that happen. If you want to stop the drug smugglers and the human traffickers, how about the human traffic and they traffic really for the most part in women, that is what they traffic in, it is women. They are not trafficking in men. They capture women, and they bring them across the open borders, and they do not go through ports of entry, where you have guards standing there with guns and rifles and everything else.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5404, "text": "They go out into the desert areas, and they hang a left, or they hang a right and they come in, but now when you have a wall, they cannot do that. They cannot do that. And so many of these Democrats that are against the wall, it is common sense? Look, you know what I saw the other day? Where the Democrats are having their convention, their national convention, they just gave out a tremendous contract. You know what it is for? They are building a big wall around the building, they are building a big wall. We should tell them, open borders. And a few years ago, almost every one of these, they are on tape. That is the problem with politics. Three years ago, they could say, look, I saw Senator Schumer, I saw Nancy I saw all of them. They said, No, we need a wall. We must have a wall. President Obama, We must have a wall. We must stop people from coming into our country illegally. We have to stop it. We need a wall. Now, a few years later, they do not want a wall. Because anything I want, they want to do the opposite. But if you want to stop the drug smugglers, human traffickers and vicious MS-3 gang members, which we are taking out every year by the thousands, and getting them the hell out of our country, because of ICE. And if you want to stop all these people from threatening our communities and poisoning our youth, you know it is poisoning our youth. That is what it is, it is nothing other than that, it is very simple. They are poisoning our youth. You have only one choice. You must elect Republicans. And to be honest with you, you have got to elect ENTITY. We need four more years. They started with Russia, Russia, Russia. Do you believe that one? I am the least racist person in this room. Then they went to recession, there is going to be a recession. Because we have a better chance of defeating him if there is a recession. And unfortunately, the stock market's only a few points from its all time high, which we have broken on, I think it is well over a hundred times. We broke the all time record. And now they have a new one. And I am enriching myself.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5405, "text": "Let me tell you, by doing this and taking this particular job, which I love, it will cost me billions and billions of dollars, but if somebody from the Middle East that I never saw before, comes in and stays in one of my hotels for an evening, and pays $439, emoluments. Nobody ever heard the word emolument before. Emolument, nobody ever heard that word, emolument. He is enriching himself. If somebody buys a tank of gas in Scotland, from an airport that I do not own, and they happen to go to a hotel, he is enriching himself, like 20 people, I am going to lose billions of dollars, and that is okay. I expected to do that when I did it. Supposing I lost, and we would have had the same basic rhetoric. Supposing, you know, I am doing all the things. I am telling you all the same sort of things. Supposing I did not make it. I would've lost and lost billions, then I would have been really unhappy. But I will tell you what, I expected that when I did this, in terms of opportunity, in terms of certain places, they can never do as well when you have this kind of rhetoric, they can never do. So I will lose billions of dollars, always expected. They say, I enrich myself because somebody is going to stay at my hotel. And these are very, very dishonest people, and they know it. So they have given up on every other hoax, but it does not work that way. You know it too. You get it. The democrat agenda of open borders places vast burdens on your communities, and your schools, and your hospitals, and public safety all at the expense of hardworking New Mexico families, and throughout our country. Sheriffs, and commissioners from nine Mexico counties recently sent a letter to your state's congressional delegation begging them to vote for strong border security they want in New Mexico. They do not want open borders. They do not want criminals pouring into your communities, and doing what they do, and we will not even talk about that. They want strong, these are people that are with you in many cases, Democrats. They write letters, we need strong border security. In San Diego, California is very difficult.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5406, "text": "Always complaining, not doing great, but they wanted a wall in San Diego, good mayor in San Diego by the way. They wanted a wall. And I said, You know what, let us build it someplace else. Because California, you know, once we build it, they will complain. They needed it. They are pouring into San Diego, like going all over the place. And people that had houses, they did not like people running over their gardens all day long, coming in from the other side. So we put up a wall, and I thought everybody would be happy. We did not want the wall. Why did you do the wall? And I will tell you, in other words, it is all a game. I'd love to take the sucker down and move it right now to New Mexico. And if I did that, they'd go crazy. And they'd say, Please sir, do not do that. The same people that are saying, We do not want a wall. Why did you put up a wall? I told my people that was going to happen. But they are very happy with their wall. Most of them will not say it. They love it. It stopped it only stopped 99.9% of the people coming in. And the only reason I am not moving it to New Mexico is that it would cost more money to move it than to build you a brand new, beautiful wall, so I will give you a brand new beautiful wall. New beautiful wall, I will give you a brand-new one. I actually priced it out. These contractors, all my life I have been deal They can find a way to make money. Sir, it'll cost more money to move the wall that they built a new one. They have it, but the commission your commissioners wrote, I quote, Our communities do not have the resources nor the budgets to handle the massive influx of immigrants we are experiencing. This is your commissioners writing to us in Washington. Our scarce resources are in danger of being rapidly depleted to the point that we will be unable to effectively care for our own citizens, you, and our existing homeless populations, many of whom are American veterans, right? So, Democrats put illegal aliens before American citizens. Republicans believe that we must take care of our own citizens first. That includes millions of hardworking, lawful immigrants who waited in line, followed the rules, and came into our country legally.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5407, "text": "And among those hardest hit by illegal immigration are Hispanic Americans who obey our laws, pay their taxes, contribute to our communities and play by the rules, and they are the ones that want to see something done and we are doing it at a level that nobody else would be capable of doing it. Whether you are a first generation or a 10th generation, every American citizen deserves a government that defends your jobs, your safety, your family, and is always loyal to you. Your politicians have not been loyal to you. They have been loyal to themselves. The Democrats are also trying to turn every city in America into a sanctuary for criminal aliens, and that is one of the very good reasons we won on Tuesday night, North Carolina, because they let people out of their sanctuary city and what those people did, I will not tell you tonight, but it was not good. It is one of the reasons we had big victories, two of them in North Carolina, sanctuary cities. And plenty of people, even in California where they have sanctuary cities, they do not want sanctuary cities. The politicians do, but they do not want them. Right here in New Mexico, Democrats are trying to turn you into a total sanctuary state, creating a safe harbor for dangerous criminal aliens and gang members that sanctuary policies release from jail. So, when MS-13 comes in, and I told you before, we take them out by the thousands and they are tough. I would say naive, but maybe it is much worse than that. They do not want to take these criminals out. And if you do not take them out and they are in New Mexico, I got to tell you something, folks. You got problems. You got problems. You have got big problems. Republicans believe our cities should be sanctuaries for law abiding Americans, not for criminal aliens. And Republicans will always support the heroes of ICE, border patrol and our great law enforcement. Do you notice I always say the Democrat party? You know, before I came, they were all calling it Democratic because it sounds better, right? The Democratic party is much nicer than the Democrat party, but their name is the Democrat party, and I am not looking for them to sound nice. I want to give their name. So, I always say the Democrat party, but that is their name, the Democrat party.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5408, "text": "Frankly, they should probably change it because it does And then I'd call them the Democratic party, but the Democrat party has never been farther outside the mainstream. I do not like those suckers. I do not know about you in New Mexico, but I am not into flies or mosquitoes. I do not like snakes too much. We have plenty of them in New York and Washington, a different variety. I do not like snakes either. We got a lot of snakes in Washington DC. We got a lot of steaks in New York. I do not like either kind of snake. I think I like the kind on the ground better than the ones we have in Washington. Every major Democrat running for president supports a massive government takeover of healthcare that would destroyed Medicare as we know it today. My administration will protect Medicare and defend your right to choose the plan and the doctor that is best for you. And we will always protect patients with preexisting conditions. The Republicans will always do that. Our ambitious campaign to reduce the price of prescription drugs has produced the largest decline in drug prices in more than 50 years. You do not hear this because the fake news does not want to write about it. Sometimes I will have a news conference about something that is so good and I will say, you know I will call my wife, first lady, first lady. People love our first lady. I will say, Wait until you see television tonight, and we did something that was so great, whatever it may be. We did a lot of things. We did something so great and it will not be on, but if there is something that is just slightly negative or even if it is good that they could turn negative, that is what they like best. We have breaking news. We have breaking news. You know, when you think of it, I am president and they are not. You know, sometimes I will be in the oval office and I will be with my people. We have great people, and I will say, You know, and it is great comm in the oval office. You do not like to hear about it because you do not hear about it too much. That is not what they But we have great comm considering it is pretty wild stuff going on in the world, right? But I will be saying, You know, they do not treat us right. They do not treat us right.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5409, "text": "And then I will just sit back, I will say, But we are in the oval office and they are not. And when you have the Democrat party and the press, the media, the lame stream media, the fake news, and they are partners They are partners, okay? They used the word manufacturer on something, never been used for that thing, and every news gets Every one of them used the word Manufactured. They know what I am talking about now. You have that, and so you have the Democrats, you have the media, their partners. Then you have the deep state. We are getting rid of a lot of them. I will tell you, we are finding them left and right. You take a look at what I will tell you what. I will tell you what. You take a look at what we are doing with all of the things. I am not going to get into detail, but you know what I am talking about. That is the ultimate cleaning of the swamp. And then I hate to say this, but we have some Republicans, they are not good. You call them a rhino. The rhinos are worse, and some of them are worse than the Obama people, right? They are worse than the Obama people. They are worse than the Clinton people, but there are not too many of them left. They are pretty much on respirators. They are gasping for air, but we do have some bad people that you would not believe. I did not hear you. I did not hear that. Virtually, every top Democrat also now supports late-term abortion, ripping babies straight from the mothers right up until the moment of birth, and that is why I have asked Congress to prohibit extreme late-term abortion because Republicans believe that every child is a sacred gift from God. I see it. Just like mom, I see it. Democrats are now the party of high taxes, high crime, open borders, late-term abortion, and socialism. The Republican party is the party of the American worker, the American family, and it is the party of the American dream. We have achieved record funding for the US military. All of that money, trillions and trillions of dollars spent all produced right here in the good old USA. And I have to tell you, New Mexico, I know you are going to like this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5410, "text": "A lot of those trillions because you know when you do the 716 and the 730 and the 700 -billion, all of a sudden you are in trillions and I can save a lot of lines when I just say trillions. A lot of that money's going to be spent in the state of the art military equipment that is being used at Holloman Air Force Base, White Sands Missile Range, Kirkland Air Force Base and many other vital New Mexico military installations that are going up as we speak. That is also jobs, but more importantly than even jobs, incredible. What you have done for the military, New Mexico, is incredible and we have remembered, but we are pouring a lot of money into New Mexico and that means a lot of good things. And we are investing in our nation's nuclear security, including right here in New Mexico and Sandia National Laboratories and Los Alamos National Laboratory. To protect American security, I withdrew the United States from the horrible one-sided Iran nuclear deal. It was no good and we oppose the toughest ever sanctions on the Iranian regime. I recognized Israel's true capitol and opened the American embassy in Jerusalem. And do not forget what I did for Israel with respect to Golan Heights. For years, you watched as your politicians apologize for America. Now, you have a president who is standing up for America and we are standing up for New Mexico. We need it because we are fighting a lot of forces, including Facebook, I saw, and Google, I saw. Did you see Google? He said I may have lost two-million to 10-million votes, according to this character that worked at Google, right? Everybody was against us. From two-million to 10.5-million votes, and we won. I do not know, we must be doing I will say this. That happened and people came from the valleys. They Came from places that nobody's ever talked about before and it was the forgotten men and women, but the truth is I know these men and women and they are the most incredible men and women in this country. They just never had anybody they really wanted to vote for or at least for a long time, they did not want to get out there. I mean, in all fairness, I do not want to go too early here. Did you watch the debate the other day? We have got almost 350-million people. I will take it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5411, "text": "Somebody said in the great state of Texas, ENTITY is down two points to Buttigieg. You know they have phony polls. I told this story the other night. For six months, I was hearing that I am going to lose the state of Texas and friends of mine from Texas that look just like these guys. And they want to say, I do not know about you, but I know a lot about Texas and ENTITY is not going to be losing the state of Texas. See, they do not say it is in play. They say Texas is in play. All these are in play and play means we could lose them, right? It is a better term though because this way, they cannot get skunked, but they can get skunked with me. So, what happens is on that beautiful election Was that one of the greatest, coolest nights ever? Well, they can never call a victory unless you absolutely have it and unless you are winning by a lot. Texas is in play. You know, he could lose Texas. I keep saying, I go to a stadium, we sell out to thousands of people, lines that are miles long. I mean, and every friend of mine says, You are going to win by a lot. 00, whatever time, The polls in Texas are closed. ENTITY has won this state of Texas. The polls in Utah are closed. ENTITY has won the state of Utah. They do not even take a breath. Now, if it is close like it is in play, you wait two, three, four or five hours to see what it is, but they do not even a breath because they are called suppression poles and they are no different than all of the dishonest reporting that you people see. They are suppression polls, and I will tell you what. We are going to win the state of New Mexico and I will be so surprised if we do not . No, we are going to win New Mexico. You know, when I came here during the last election, came here a little because I was told very hard to win and I came here a little, but I saw great spirit. But I did not really have a track record because I never did this stuff before. So, I said I was going to cut your taxes. I said I was going to cut your regulations. I did more than any president in history and they have been there for many years. I have been there for two and a half.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5412, "text": "And I think the regulation cutting Like the Waters of the US, that was another beauty where you could not build a house, you could not farm your land. Now, what we have done on regulations is incredible. I have done I have rebuilt our military, I have taken care of our vets. Look how happy our vets are with choice. Instead of waiting for two months to see a doctor or two weeks or three days, they now go out. If there is a wait, they go out, they get a private doctor. They get taken care of. We pay the bill. And for the first time, they have tried to get that for 45 years, they have not been able to get it, but I am good at getting things. The 2020 election is about one thing. What is it about? It is about you. It is about you. It is about you. I am doing a good job as your messenger, but basically I am a messenger. I know what you want. I understand that it is about your family. It is about your future, and it is about the fate of your country for your children, for everybody. It is about the fate of your country. It is about the future of our great country. No matter what label they use, a vote for any Democrat in 2020 is a vote for the rise of radical socialism and the destruction of the American dream. That is what it is about. Venezuela, 15 years ago, was one of the wealthiest countries in the world and today, very sad. We begin this campaign with the best record, the best results, the best agenda, and the only positive vision for America. Together, we will help millions more citizens know the dignity of work, the pride of a paycheck and the satisfaction of a job really well done. With your help, we will elect a Republican Congress to create a safe, modern, fair, and very lawful system of immigration. You saw the figures last week, but we are doing it the hard way. It would be so much easier with a little stroke of the pen. We will enact trade deals that ensure more products are proudly stamped with those beautiful, beautiful words, that incredible phrase, Made in the USA. We will achieve new breakthroughs in science and medicine, finding new cures for childhood cancer and ending the ENTITY epidemic in America within 10 years, and we have already started that program. We have the medicine. Nobody even knew that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5413, "text": "The ENTITY epidemic in this country will be gone within 10 years. We have already started the process. Who would've thought that? Honestly, when I ran, I did not know that. We have now the technology and what they have done with respect to ENTITY is incredible. What a terrible, terrible period of time the world went through, but we will have it ended within 10 years. We will defeat the effort to drive up the cost of houses, cars, healthcare, light bulbs. They took away our light bulb. I want an incandescent light. I want to pay less money to look better. Does that make sense? You pay much less money and you look much better and on top of that, with the new bulbs, if they break, it is considered a hazardous waste site. It is all gases inside and you are supposed to bring it back to where you bought it in a sealed container. I asked the people, the professionals, Well, what do people do when it breaks? What do they do? Nothing, they throw it away. A lot of people did not know. You got a much better light at a much reduced cost and it is much safer because when those other bulbs break, they really are dangerous. These are the little things that I have to explain. Otherwise, people will say, What the hell are you doing with light bulbs for? And we are trying to do the same thing with cars. Cars have so much junk on them now to save a tiny little fraction of gasoline. They have so much junk that they are less safe. So, what I want to do is the following. Under our rules and regulations, the cars are environmentally terrific, but they are safer and they are $3,500 less to buy, right? I mean, they make them now like paper mache. Somebody touches them and the entire car collapses. When somebody hits me, I want to be in as close to an army tank as possible. No, they are made out of paper mache. They weigh about three pounds and if you get hit by a bus, it is over. They say, What happened to that car? No, I think of it, it is safer and it is less expensive by $3,500 on average. And California wants you to do the other cars and we do not . We are going to end up in a big litigation and I am fighting for you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5414, "text": "Look, it is not the kind of thing most presidents would be fighting for because they say, Let them pay more. They listen to the environmentalists, and I am an environmentalist. I believe in the environment. I want the cleanest water on the planet. I want the cleanest air. I want a lot of things. You know, right now, we have the cleanest air that we have ever had in this country? But what are they going to do about China and India and Russia and other countries that are spewing stuff? What are we doing about them? We are going to keep our nation clean. But you know, the universe is so big that when you talk about China, the USA, India, you talk about these different places where a lot of bad stuff comes out, right? It is so big that it is right next to each other. It is right next to each other. Does that make sense? It is right next to each other. So, what are they going to do? We want to have the cleanest water and the cleanest air. We will defend privacy. We will defend free speech, free assembly, religious liberty, and we will always defend your second amendment and we are doing it now. And above all, we will never stop fighting for the values that bind us together as one America. We support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. We stand with our incredible heroes of law enforcement. We believe in the dignity of work and in the sanctity of life. We believe that mothers and fathers, not Washington bureaucrats, know best how to raise their strong, beautiful families in their loving and wonderful communities. We believe that children should be taught to love our country, honor our history, and always respect our great American flag. And we will always live by the words of our national motto. Nobody will ever take it down. Nobody will ever take it down. We will never allow them to take it down. In God we trust. We stand on the shoulders of American Patriots who built this country into the greatest nation ever to exist on the face of the earth and we are going to be better than ever before and it will not even be close, and we are right there. Our ancestors crossed the oceans, settled a continent, tamed the wilderness, revolutionized industry, pioneered sciences, won two world wars, defeated fascism and communism, put a man on the moon and built the most exceptional country in the history of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpnewmexicorallytranscriptfullspeechtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump New Mexico Rally Transcript: Full Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-new-mexico-rally-transcript-full-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "17-09-2019", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5429, "text": "I feel grateful to have the chance here to join my colleagues to mark the anniversary of January 6. And I thank the Chair of the Rules Committee, Senator Klobuchar, for her leadership in all of this. We had an insurrection here a year ago that could have very easily turned into a conflagration if it had not been for the incredible bravery of the Capitol Police and the other law enforcement that was summoned to the Capitol, too late, but nevertheless, here. The National Guard, as my colleague from Virginia was talking about, they kept this place from being burned down. They kept people from getting killed. They lost their lives on that day and in subsequent days because of the trauma that they were exposed to. They suffered racial epithets that nobody in America should have to suffer shouted in the halls of this Capitol. And there are people here, as my colleague from Wisconsin said, who are claiming that they were acting like tourists. I just heard somebody downstairs in the basement walking by and they were pointing out one of those pictures that is down there of newsboys standing in front of the Capitol when they were kids. Because this place, for the people that work here -- I am not talking about the Senate, but the people that work here that are the staff, whose grandparents worked here, whose great uncles are on the pictures downstairs. To them, this is a family. It was assaulted on behalf of people that came summoned here by the president who claimed that the election had been stolen from him, who was perpetrating a big lie about what had happened in the election. And it is tragic that a year later, we still have to come here and say, Joe Biden won the election. And he did by any fair study of what happened that day on election day. He won Arizona by 10,000 votes. He won Georgia by 11,000 votes. He won Wisconsin by 20,000 votes. He won Pennsylvania by 80,000 votes, in Michigan by 150,000 votes. In every one of those swing states, he won by more votes than Donald Trump won in his election against Hillary Clinton. This margin was bigger in those states, except Arizona, than the margin that Donald Trump had won when he won the election against Hillary Clinton. Joe Biden won this election by 7 million votes. Donald Trump actually lost the popular vote when he won the election by 3 million votes. But his election was not seriously contended by anybody.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "bennetsenategovpublicindexcfm20221bennetspeaksonthesenatefloorontheanniversaryofthejanuary6thattackontheuscapitol", "title": "speech Bennet Speaks on the Senate Floor on the Anniversary of the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol", "source": "https://www.bennet.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2022/1/bennet-speaks-on-the-senate-floor-on-the-anniversary-of-the-january-6th-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol", "publication_date": "06-01-2022", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Michael Bennet"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5430, "text": "And it should not have been, because he'd won the Electoral College. Just as Joe Biden had won the Electoral College. His lawyers -- Donald Trump's lawyers -- have been thrown out of more than 60 courtrooms by state and federal judges, some of them appointed by President Trump himself, saying that there was no evidence that there was fraud. They did not actually vote, they were dead, but people cast ballots on behalf of them. Four people out of 5 million and one of those cast a vote for Donald Trump. But President Trump continues to say that there were dead people voting all over the United States of America. The Associated Press did a review of all those swing states that I was mentioning earlier, and they found that if you just looked at the disputed ballots -- so these are not even fraudulent ballots, because they have not been identified as fraudulent, they are just disputed ballots -- that in all these cases, the disputed ballots came to about .15% of the margin in any one of these races. In other words, in not a single one of these swing states where there is a dispute that President Trump has brought, would it make a material difference, even if it were true, what you are alleging. And he is still doubled down on the big lie. And the result of that is, as my colleagues have said here today, there are more than 400 bills nationwide, in the name of that big lie, making it harder for the American people to vote, making it harder for them to register, making it harder for people to vote early, or to vote by mail. In Texas, they are down to one dropbox per county. In Colorado, I can practically cross my street and vote at a dropbox. This is an effort to subvert elections to cling to power. And it is based on a massive falsehood -- the big lie. I think one needs to ask oneself, even people that support President Trump, what future does the stop the steal movement imagine for our country? What future do they imagine for this democracy where every election is going to be contested? Where political violence replaces the ballot box. Where elections are decided by strongmen, not votes, turning us into Russia or China. Is that really what we want our legacy to be here in the country?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "bennetsenategovpublicindexcfm20221bennetspeaksonthesenatefloorontheanniversaryofthejanuary6thattackontheuscapitol", "title": "speech Bennet Speaks on the Senate Floor on the Anniversary of the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol", "source": "https://www.bennet.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2022/1/bennet-speaks-on-the-senate-floor-on-the-anniversary-of-the-january-6th-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol", "publication_date": "06-01-2022", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Michael Bennet"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5431, "text": "Do we want to be the first generation of Americans to decide that it is just too hard to do our duty to the people that founded this country, the people that fought from the time this country was founded until today, who died for the sake of democracy, that it is just too hard? That somehow our differences are unique, or so important that we are going to give up on our shared commitment to the democracy in favor of those disagreements? And I think we need to ask ourselves at a moment like this, what we owe the generations of Americans that have fought to make this country more democratic, more fair, and more free. What do we owe the 158 million Americans -- a record -- who showed up during a plague, this ENTITY pandemic, to cast their votes for Donald Trump and for Joe Biden -- what are they owed? And what do we owe our kids and our grandkids? I think the answer is very clear, which is a stronger democracy, an economy that works for everybody, not just the people at the very top. We have one of the highest voter turnouts in the country. I always have to say, especially when the senator from Minnesota is around, that we are number two in terms of voter turnout, Minnesota is number one, but we are coming for you. We should have vote by mail, we should have early balloting. We have all of that in Colorado, one of the highest turnout rates in the country, and no fraud. So I am going to just finish by saying that we should distrust politicians who cannot seem to win people's votes with their argument, just as we should distrust politicians who attack the free press to avoid accountability even though that free press is enshrined in our Constitution. And we should recommit to each other and the democracy. Let me tell you something, Mr. President. Last week we had another tragedy in Colorado, another disaster. Boulder, Colorado started out this year with a mass shooting in a grocery store, some of you may remember that. And basically on New Year's Eve, we had a massive fire that ripped through neighborhoods in the front range of Colorado in Boulder County. And I sat there thinking to myself as I was with my daughters watching those fires on the television set, how much we actually need each other, you know.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "bennetsenategovpublicindexcfm20221bennetspeaksonthesenatefloorontheanniversaryofthejanuary6thattackontheuscapitol", "title": "speech Bennet Speaks on the Senate Floor on the Anniversary of the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol", "source": "https://www.bennet.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2022/1/bennet-speaks-on-the-senate-floor-on-the-anniversary-of-the-january-6th-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol", "publication_date": "06-01-2022", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Michael Bennet"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5432, "text": "Illinois is going to give you the greatest majority come November that any Democratic Governor in this Nation received. I want to pay tribute to your fighting Senator, the representative of all the people, all the time, Paul Douglas. I have enjoyed traveling through Illinois this afternoon with Lieutenant Governor Samuel Shapiro, Attorney General William Clark, State Auditor Michael Howlett, your candidate for secretary of state, Paul Powell, your National committeewoman, Dorothy O'Brien, your congressional candidate, Mr. Cole Baker, your State chairman, Jim Ronan. Now, my fellow Americans, we have come to the end of a long and busy and thrilling and inspiring day. Everywhere we have gone, from the time we left early this morning until late this evening, we have seen young Democrats, middle-aged Democrats, senior Democrats, Independents, Republicans who want to vote for a President in November that will represent all the people. I think I can tell you that the ticket of Johnson and Humphrey is going to lead this Nation to a great victory come November. Four weeks from today the American people will have made their choice. I have come here tonight to set that choice before the people. This is a great day in America's heartland. America today is the richest nation and the most prosperous nation and the most powerful nation on earth, and as long as I am your ENTITY I intend to keep it that way. Illinois is today the powerhouse of America, and Governor Kerner and I intend to keep it that way. Today, for the first time in history, over 70 million Americans have jobs. Personal income after taxes has risen by $80 billion in 3 years and corporate profits after taxes have increased over $12 billion. The stock market has reached an all-time high. The value of the stocks on the New York Stock Exchange are worth $100 billion more than they were when I took office last November. And in this great surge, Illinois has been one of the leading States of the Nation. Illinois is today one of the top States in the Union, as Governor Kerner said, in exports to foreign nations--both industrial and agricultural exports. Illinois today has one of the lowest unemployment rates of any industrial State in the Union, and I will tell you who has been fighting to bring that about--your own great Senator Paul Douglas. Illinois was the only industrial State that was able to reduce its public aid under Federal programs last year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecourthousestepspeoria", "title": "Remarks on the Courthouse Steps in Peoria", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-courthouse-steps-peoria", "publication_date": "07-10-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5433, "text": "Illinois today has more men and women learning more new skills under the Manpower Development and Training Act than any other State in the entire Union. In 1961 the unemployment rate in Illinois was 6.4 percent. In July of this year that rate had been slashed more than 33 percent. Since August of 1961, more than a dozen labor areas of Illinois have been taken off the list of areas of substantial unemployment -including your own great city of Peoria. I understand that a man who works in the Unemployment Compensation Service is afraid if things keep on going this way, he will be out of a job pretty soon. Yes, you are rebuilding Peoria. You have a positive program. You stand for something. You are not just a bunch of negative aginers. The excitement of rebirth is everywhere in this city. You can see it. You can feel it. It is in the air. You have new office buildings, you have new civic buildings, you have new highways, you have new motels. Yes, this is a proud, new city of the future in the 20th century, and you are entitled to 20th century leadership, and you are going to get it November 3d. One of your great industrial companies expects its first billion-dollar-year this year. All the signs read Help Wanted, Men at Work. And we intend to keep it that way. None of this has happened by accident. It has happened because you had the vision to rebuild your city. It happened because your State and National Governments have pursued policies that made progress possible, policies that insured economic growth. Let me give you just one example. The biggest tax cut in American history, recommended by our late beloved, martyred President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and supported by most of the men in the House of Representatives and in the United States Senate, was enacted by the Congress. In that tax bill we reduced the tax bill of the average taxpayer by 20 percent. We created 130,000 new jobs in Illinois. We generated an increase in total Illinois income of $2 billion. We boosted State and local tax revenues by $160 million. We cut Illinois withholding tax payments by $500 million. Four years ago the mighty industrial and agricultural center of Illinois was stalled on dead center. Today, Illinois is on the move, and we intend to keep Illinois moving forward. There are those who say repeal the bills that have made America great. Let us continue, and that is the choice before the American people this November.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecourthousestepspeoria", "title": "Remarks on the Courthouse Steps in Peoria", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-courthouse-steps-peoria", "publication_date": "07-10-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5434, "text": "You have a clear, unmistakable choice between continuing those policies that have brought us to a peak of prosperity, or turning to policies that will wreck our progress. The social security system has made it possible for 19,700,000, almost 20 million Americans--one out of every 10 persons in this country--to live under that social security system and they are permitted to live their later years in dignity, with security. Now there are those in this land who believe that our social security system should be changed. Even members of their own party say a voluntary plan would wreck social security, it would bankrupt the system. This is one of the most important issues in this campaign. Americans are not going to gamble on social security. They are not going to risk destroying a program that has proved the bedrock of security for our older citizens. We are going to fight for and strengthen and defend and protect social security, and we are going to extend it when the Congress meets again! The Illinois AFL-CIO State convention meeting here in Peoria has fought for social security. He was one of the architects of the Social Security Act of 1935, and through the years he has been its staunchest friend. Do you want to go back to the 1930's when all the doors were closed, when all the signs read No help wanted ? Or do you want to move forward to the wide open vistas of the 1960's? For 30 years, under 5 different Presidents, we have followed a course to a stable, prosperous, and good society, where child labor is outlawed, where minimum wages are guaranteed, where the elderly receive social security and the young find opportunity; where labor and industry bargain freely; where our Nation is safe with a defense system stronger than those of all the other nations on earth combined. We are not about to give any of those rights up. Peace on earth, good will toward men. The road to peace is not an easy one. It is fraught with many perils. It has many side turns. But we move along it and we must move calmly. We must move with resolution, and above all, as good Americans, we must move carefully and responsibly at all times. Things get very lonely in Washington sometimes. The real voice of the great people of America sometimes sounds faint, and sometimes sounds distant. Well, we have to get away from Washington once in a while to come out and see the young Democrats and the great citizens of this land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecourthousestepspeoria", "title": "Remarks on the Courthouse Steps in Peoria", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-courthouse-steps-peoria", "publication_date": "07-10-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5435, "text": "And I think if Woodrow Wilson were here in Peoria this afternoon, he would not think that your voices sounded faint or distant, because he would know that we are here in the heartland of America, and that you are going to lead us to victory in November. Yes, all day I have seen your smiling faces. All day I have looked into your happy countenances. All day I have seen the family life, the mothers and the children of America here in the heartland of the great State of Illinois. And those voices sound powerful to me. And when I return to the White House, and the policemen turn the keys on those locks on those big black gates, and I get to those few acres that are back of our house, it is going to be folks like you that sustain me in my labors and in my thoughts. It is going to be prayers like yours that give us inspiration and hope and leadership and make it possible for us some way, somehow, to achieve peace on earth. And I want each of you to know that you have a part to play in American history, that you have a responsibility as citizens of the most powerful nation in the world, that you have an obligation as Americans-whether you are Democrats or whether you are Republicans, or whether you are Independents-and that obligation is to go out and work and fight and give the best talents you have to make democracy live. Ten months ago, in a tragic moment, I was called upon to assume the awesome responsibilities of ENTITY of this country. And I told you that afternoon, after I took the oath of office in Air Force One, that I wanted you to give me your help and give me your hand, and give me your prayers; that all I could tell you was I would do the best I could. We had a difficult transition period because all the world was looking at us. And our own people and the other peoples of the world were watching what course America would take. You sustained me with your strength. You helped me with your prayers. America united--the businessman, the labor man, the farmer, the Congress--all put their shoulders to the wheel, and America became a united nation instead of a divided nation. America became a nation of lovers instead of a nation of haters. America became a nation of people who have faith instead of people who have doubt. You are going to do what is best for your country. You are going to do what is best for America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecourthousestepspeoria", "title": "Remarks on the Courthouse Steps in Peoria", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-courthouse-steps-peoria", "publication_date": "07-10-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5441, "text": "It is great to be in southern Illinois. I appreciate the chance to come to Madison County. I am honored to be the first sitting ENTITY to visit the city of Collinsville. I am sorry Laura is not with me. I was hoping she and I could go look at the Catsup Bottle. I had a visit with some of the some folks from the area here, a neurosurgeon, a cardiologist, the administrator of a hospital, ob-gyn, a patient, all about the health care crisis that exists here in this part of the world. And that is what I am here to talk about. I am here to talk about how we need to fix a broken medical liability system. I want to thank all the good folks who provide health care for the folks in this part of the world, the nurses, the docs, the administrators. Thanks for taking an active interest in an important issue that faces not only this part of the world but the country. But really what I am here to do is to make say as clearly as I can, the United States Congress needs to pass real medical liability reform this year. And there is no doubt in my mind we have a strong ally in this issue in the great Speaker of the House of Representatives from the great State of Illinois, Denny Hastert. And I want to thank Congressman John Shimkus for his leadership not only on this issue but on other issues. It is good to be with his wife, Karen, again, sons, David, Joshua, and Daniel. And you brought Mom and Dad. Your mom is probably telling you what to do, just like mine is. I am also proud to be traveling today with a great Congressman from Peoria, Illinois, Ray LaHood. The State Treasurer of Illinois has joined us, Judy Baar Topinka. He is the minority leader in the house. He is leading the medical liability reform effort. And I want to thank you, Tom, for taking a strong role. Fill the potholes. Pass the highway bill. I want to thank those of you who are working on this medical liability issue here in the State of Illinois. I appreciate your efforts. It is about time you let people know what is on your mind. It is time to make sure that the issue comes to the forefront not only at the Federal level but at the local level as well. I want to thank Connie Bergmann. I met Connie.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5442, "text": "She came out to the airport airbase, and kind of airbase-airport combo, I guess it is. She is a volunteer for the American Red Cross. The reason I bring her up is, every stop I make in America I like to herald a citizen who is taken time out of his or her life to volunteer to make the country a better place. See, the great strength of America is not our military might, and it is certainly not the size of our wallets. The great strength of America lies in the hearts and souls of our fellow citizens, people who are willing to love a neighbor just like they'd like to be loved themselves, people who are willing to take time to volunteer to make America a better place. And I want to thank you for serving the Red Cross. And speaking about the Red Cross, the International Red Cross is doing heroic work in a part of the world that has suffered incredible, incredible death and destruction. The American people express our sympathy to the victims of the tsunami disasters. Yesterday I spoke to Secretary of State Colin Powell and Governor Jeb Bush of Florida, who I sent on a delegation with a delegation to assess the relief operations. And they reported in that the devastation is beyond comprehension. They also reported in that they will come back with an assessment about how we can more effectively help. But they also reported that our military is doing heroic work in helping to save life. They are flying rescue missions 24 hours a day. They are making a huge difference in the people's lives over there by delivering supplies directly to those in need. Our Government has not only stepped up with the use of military assets, but we have pledged $350 million in disaster assistance to help the people over there who are suffering. As you know, I tapped a couple of ex-President's number 41 and number 42, to help out. I asked them to help, and they are. My dad and President Clinton have graciously given of their time to help make sure that people know there is a need and to make sure the donations are properly channeled into programs that work. If you want to help, get on the Internet for the USA www.usafreedomcorps.gov. And on that web page, you will find different agencies which are doing the good work. What I do not want is, I do not want people to be sending money to places that are not really doing the job. We do not need to support organizations that are not effectively delivering compassion and help.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5443, "text": "And so on this web page, you will find a way to help, if you so desire to do so. What they tell me is, the most important contribution a person can give is cash, and let the agencies on the ground be able to use that cash to best meet the needs of those who have suffered. I want to thank all the Americans who thus far have been participating in this urgent cause. You are showing the true strength of America through your good heart. This is my first trip after the New Year. And it is good to come here to Illinois. I am rested and ready to continue to serve to be your to continue to be your ENTITY and to serve the people of this country. And we have got a big agenda item a big agenda and a series of items that we will be dealing with. First of all, we are going to win the war on terror. We will not give in to these people. We have a duty in your Government to protect the American people. So the second big task at hand is to make sure we do everything we can to protect our homeland. And I will assure you I will continue to work to spread freedom and democracy and, therefore, peace in parts of the world that are desperate for freedom, democracy, and peace. We are going to work with the Congress to be wise about how we spend your money. We are going to keep your taxes low so this economy continues to grow. We are going to continue to work with our farmers and ranchers to make sure they can sell the products overseas, in markets where people need food and beef and pork. We are going to work to pass a national energy plan. We are going to work to cut our deficit in half over the next 5 years. And I look forward to working with members of both political parties to do something about our health care system. First, it is important for Americans to understand we have the best health care system in the world. And we need to keep it that way. We have got the best hospitals, both urban and rural. We have got the world's most talented and compassionate doctors and nurses. And we have got the world's and we lead the world in innovative research. We are on the cutting edge of change. We are saving lives through our research. Americans should be proud of our medical system, and we all must be grateful for those who work hard to provide compassion and care. Our health care system faces serious challenges. We all know that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5444, "text": "The cost of health care is rising rapidly, and that burdens our families. It hurts our small businesses. It makes it harder for the job creators to expand the job base. Too many Americans are left struggling to find affordable health care. And so I think we need to take practical steps to make sure this health care system of ours is more affordable and available, and we have got to take those steps this year. To improve health care in America, we need to expand the use of health savings accounts. It is a product that lets you save tax-free for routine medical care while keeping affordable coverage against major illness. Small businesses must be allowed to join together, to pool risk so they can buy insurance for their employees at the same discounts that big businesses are able to do. To address the cost of medical care, we need to apply 21st century information technology to the health care field. We need to have our medical records put on the IT. We need to make sure that we speed up the delivery and arrival of cheaper generic drugs to help control costs. We want to make sure our Medicare system still allows seniors to have choice in the system. We have got to make sure we expand community health centers around our country to provide care for the poor and the indigent. And we have got to make sure low-income children are enrolled in government health care programs so they receive the care they need. These are practical steps to help people be able to find health care at affordable prices and, at the same time, make sure the health care system is not run by the Federal Government but by patients and doctors. To make sure our health care system works the way we want it to work, we have got to address the root causes of rising medical costs. Part of addressing those costs can be achieved by introducing information technology. Part of addressing those costs can be achieved by introducing generic drugs faster, just like I mentioned. Some of the cost increases in our health care system are necessary and worthwhile. After all, research into new treatments requires major investments. In other words, to stay on the leading edge of medicine, it costs money. And I suspect somebody whose life has been saved by the latest technology is going to say that cost increase was necessary. And that is what the American people must understand and Members of the United States Senate and the United States House must understand. Many of the costs that we are talking about do not start in an examining room or an operating room; they start in a courtroom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5445, "text": "What is happening all across this country is that lawyers are filing baseless suits against hospitals and doctors. They know the medical liability system is tilted in their favor. Jury awards in medical liability cases have skyrocketed in recent years. That means every claim filed by a personal-injury lawyer brings the chance of a huge payoff or a profitable settlement out of court. That is what that means. Doctors and hospitals realize this. They know it is expensive to fight a lawsuit, even if it does not have any merit. And because the system is so unpredictable, there is a constant risk of being hit by a massive jury award. So doctors end up paying tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to settle claims out of court, even when they know they have done nothing wrong. That is what is happening in the system today. It is costly for the doctors. It is costly for small businesses. It is costly for hospitals. It is really costly for patients. When those providing insurance have to pay the bills for enormous jury verdicts or out-of-court settlements, they have to raise premiums on physicians they cover. Specialists in high-risk practices like ob-gyn or neurosurgery are particularly vulnerable to lawsuits, so their premiums rise the fastest. You are about to hear a couple of stories of folks in this area who can testify to that fact. Because junk lawsuits are so unpredictable, they drive up insurance costs for all doctors, even for those who have never been sued, even for those who have never had a claim against them. When insurance premiums rise, doctors have no choice but to pass some of the costs on to their patients. That means you are paying for junk lawsuits every time you go to see your doctor. That is the effect of all the lawsuits. It affects your wallet. If you are a patient, it means you are paying a higher cost to go see your doctor. If part of the national strategy has got to be to make sure health care is available and affordable, health care becomes less affordable because of junk lawsuits. And that is what the people of southern Illinois and the people of America must understand, that every time you read about big jury verdicts or out-of-court settlements or lawsuits being filed here or there, you are paying for it. give up medicine entirely, or to move to another place where they can afford to practice medicine. And that problem affects all doctors, from family practitioners in rural towns to surgeons in big-city hospitals.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5446, "text": "In 2003, almost half of all American hospitals lost physicians or reduced services because of medical liability concerns. One-half of all American hospitals lost physicians. Over the past 2 years, the liability crisis has forced out about 160 physicians in Madison and St. Clair counties alone. the patients, the people who live in these good towns in this part of the world. Pregnant women have to travel longer distances for checkups. Accident victims lose critical minutes in transit to faraway emergency rooms. New residents, people you are trying to get to come and live in your communities, have a hard time finding doctors willing to accept extra patients. And that causes the quality of life in your community to deteriorate. It is a problem that we must address. America's health care professionals should be focused on fighting illnesses, not on fighting lawsuits. Junk lawsuits change the way docs do their job. Instead of trying to heal the patients, doctors try not to get sued. Makes sense, does not it? If you are worried about getting sued, you are going to do everything you can to make sure you do not get sued. That means they are writing prescriptions or ordering tests that really are not necessary, just to reduce the potential of a future lawsuit. They have specialists who stop taking emergency room calls. Doctors turn away patients with complicated, life-threatening conditions because they carry the highest risk for a lawsuit. Defensive medicine drives a wedge between the doctors and the patients, and defensive medicine is incredibly costly for our society. Altogether, defensive medicine drains some 60 to 100 billion dollars from the economy. Defensive medicine raises medical bills for patients and increases insurance costs for employers, and it takes money away that small businesses could use to invest and expand. This liability system of ours is, what I am telling you, is out of control. And you have people in this area and the doctors in this area understand what I am talking about. A recent study ranked Madison County the number one place in the country for trial lawyers to sue. And those of you traveling in from St. Clair County are not doing much better. Clair is ranked the second county in America where you are likely to get sued. In other words, if you see a team of trial lawyers spending a lot of time in the Collinsville area, you can be pretty sure they are not looking for horseradish. Let me share some of the stories of the folks I met with today. I think this will help clarify what I am trying to say to you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5447, "text": "Chris Heffner is with us. He is a neurosurgeon from Belleville Memorial and St. Elizabeth Hospitals. He is one of only two neurosurgeons still practicing south of Springfield, Illinois. You have got two people in the area. In just 2 years, his annual premiums have more than doubled from $131,000 a year to $265,000 a year. And at the same time, his amount of insurance coverage has been cut in half. A few years ago, Chris decided that closing his head trauma part of his practice was the only way he could afford to stay in this area. He told me he loves living here in this part of the world. He likes to raise his family here. He and his wife made a tough decision to stay here, in spite of the fact that his premiums doubled and he got half the coverage. And so the only way he could stay here and to provide a level of care that he wants everybody to have was to cut out part of his practice. He still treats dozens of patients with spinal cord injuries, but now brain trauma victims in southern Illinois have to be airlifted across the river to St. Louis. I spent years of training to do brain surgery. It is a big part of my life. I made a commitment to stay here, but I had to make adjustments to keep the ax from falling. Greg Gabliani is with us. He is from Alton, and he is a cardiologist. He was raised in Quincy, and he moved to Madison County in 2001, even though his colleagues warned him about the medical liability crisis here. In 3 years, his premiums have risen from $12,500 to $60,000 a year 3 quick years. Last year he had to stop performing certain procedures to bring his costs under control. He said, You either have to change the nature of your practice, or you have to leave. He did not want to leave, so he is having to cut back on his services. We have got a problem, folks. I met with Bob Moore. He is the CEO of Red Bud Regional Hospital. He is a father of six, I want you to know. His hospital has a long tradition of delivering babies, but this past November, he made the difficult decision to close his ob unit. The malpractice see, he had the they employ the doctors in his hospital.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5448, "text": "They are going to cover the insurance for them, and it doubled from $150,000 to $270,000 more than doubled. They are paying $270,000 a year now. That is a lot for a little hospital in a small town. Maybe for a big hospital, it is not a lot, or for those of us who are used to dealing with the Federal budget, it is not a lot. It is a lot for a small town hospital. Red Bud used to handle 120 deliveries a year. But now a lot of the women have to drive an hour to get to an ob unit. It is affecting rural medicine. It happens to be the medical liability crisis, is affecting rural medicine. Lawsuits are affecting rural medicine. I could not put it any better, Bob. It is a societal issue that we must deal with. It is a quality of life issue. We do not want our little towns being not having any health care. We want people who live in rural America, like Crawford, Texas to be able to get to have a quality of life . Leslie Scariano is with us. She is an ob-gyn from Alton. She spent her entire career as a doctor in southern Illinois, and she has never been sued. She shut down her practice on December the 31st of this year because her premiums have skyrocketed out of control. That means she could not afford to stay in practice. quit practicing medicine, or go broke. She said, I do not want to quit practicing medicine and I am not going broke, so I am going to move to Colorado. You lost a good soul from this part of the world because the system is out of control. Leslie's premiums will be about 80 percent lower in Colorado than here in Illinois. I met with Kim Vogel, who is right with us yes, there she is. She was one of Leslie's patients. She is expecting her second child early next month like, soon. When she found out she was pregnant last year, Kim started seeing the ob-gyn that delivered her daughter, Katie. That ob-gyn moved to Tennessee. Then she started seeing Leslie. Leslie is moving to Colorado. Kim is now on her third ob-gyn, and she is worried about it. She said, I understand the doctors' position. I do not blame them. But as a patient, I see them leave and I think, what am I going to do now, and where does that leave me?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5449, "text": "I feel like I have lost control over how my pregnancy will go. Unfortunately, this is not just a story confined to this part of the world. This is a story of pregnant moms all over America who are wondering whether or not they are going to be able to find good quality health care for their child and themselves. I have come to this part of the world because I want to assure you that, one, I understand the problem and I intend to work with Congress to do something about it. You know, when I was the Governor of Texas, I felt that we could solve medical liability issues at the State level. One is that a State would pass good medical liability reform, and all the trial lawyers would do is go to the State that has lousy medical liability law. So you are not solving the problem, you are just shifting the problem. You are making the quality of life issue go from one area the deterioration of quality of life issue go from one area to the next. That did not seem to make any sense. But the other thing I discovered is that because of medical liability problems and lawsuits and increasing premiums and the defensive practice of medicine, your Federal budget spends $28 billion a year, extra money. See, we have to pay for Medicaid and Medicare and veterans' benefits. The rising cost of health care, the number of lawsuits, the defensive practice of medicine is driving up the cost to our taxpayers. Medical liability reform is a national issue, and it requires a national solution. So I went to Congress with some proposals that I think are fair, proposals that will build confidence in the judicial system. Nobody likes to come to a part of the world that says the judicial system is out of control, and people lose confidence in it. We have got to have confidence in the fairness of our system. We want people who are harmed to be able to get have their day in court and get fair treatment in the courts of law. But we want we do not want a system that is so tilted the other way that it runs good doctors out of business and makes it hard for hospitals to deliver care. I believe a victim of a legitimate medical error should be allowed to collect full economic damages, 100 percent of the cost of their medical care and recovery plus economic losses for the rest of their life. And when appropriate, injured people should be allowed to collect reasonable noneconomic damages. And in the case of truly egregious wrongdoing, patients should be entitled to punitive damages.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5450, "text": "But there needs to be some reason when it comes to noneconomic damages in the system, and that is why I proposed a hard cap of $250,000 on noneconomic damages. Interestingly enough, the State of California has a cap on noneconomic damages that was enacted in 1975. Patients in that State see their claims settled a third faster than in States without those limits. In other words, patients are treated more fairly where there is a cap. And since 1975, insurance premiums for California doctors have become much more affordable premiums than anywhere else in the country than in most States. Caps on noneconomic damages work. It is a good idea, and the Congress ought to adopt them. We have another problem with our legal system, and that is trial lawyers sometimes sue all the doctors involved in the patient's case even if most of the doctors have nothing to do with the patient's injuries. It is simply unfair to punish doctors who have done nothing wrong. And so to make sure doctors and hospitals are treated fairly, Congress needs to pass joint and several liability reform. I think the people are beginning to understand the importance of this issue. 160 docs leave 2 counties. People understand that no patient has ever been healed by a frivolous lawsuit; no small business has ever grown because of a frivolous lawsuit; the cause of justice is never served by frivolous lawsuit. I know you are serious about this liability issue here. I talked about it everywhere I went on the campaign nearly everywhere I went on the campaign trail, and I believe the voters made their position clear on election day about medical liability. The House passed a good medical liability reform bill last year. I want to thank the two Members of Congress for working on it. We have got a new chance to get something done for the on behalf of the American people. Both Houses will have a fresh opportunity to address this issue. I am looking forward to working with the leadership of the House to get the bill moving. It is important for the United States Senators from this State and other States to recognize the significance of the problem and get a meaningful, real medical liability bill to my desk so I can sign it in the year 2005. Junk lawsuits affect more than just the medical field. According to a recent study, frivolous litigation has helped drive the total cost of our tort system to more than $230 billion a year. That is the equivalent of $3,200 for every family of four.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5451, "text": "The lawsuit burden falls especially hard on small businesses. And yet small businesses are the engine of job are the engines of job creation in our country. Seventy percent of all new jobs in America are created by small businesses. The tort costs in America are now far higher than in any other major industrialized nation. We live in a competitive world. This is a global economy, and so our tort system has become a needless disadvantage for American manufacturers and entrepreneurs. To protect small businesses and workers, we need to change the way we handle class-action lawsuits. Interestingly enough, this is another problem you know well in Madison County. The number of class actions filed here increased by over 5,000 percent between 1998 and 2003, even though the vast majority of defendants named in those suits are not actually from Madison County. These massive interstate class actions clog your local courts. They hurt the honest workers and communities of the businesses targeted by the class-action lawyers. The proper place for large interstate class actions to be tried is not in a local court but rather in a Federal court, which are designed . I look forward to working with both bodies and members of both parties to get good class-action reform out of the Congress this year. I will also work with Congress to reform asbestos litigation. Asbestos lawsuits in southern Illinois and elsewhere have led to the bankruptcy of dozens of companies and cost tens of thousands of jobs. Many asbestos claims are filed on behalf of people who are not sick. The volume of asbestos lawsuits is beyond the capacity of our courts to handle, and it is growing. Congress has begun considering options to improve the current system for handling asbestos lawsuits. I look forward to signing an asbestos reform in 2005. I think we are sent to Washington to solve problems, not to pass them on to future Congresses. I believe we are called to do the hard work to make our communities and quality of life a better place. And it is hard work for some in Congress to stand up to the trial lawyers. I understand that. And most of all, we want the patients and the American people treated fairly. And I appreciate you all giving me a chance to come by and talk about the vital issue of legal reform. I intend to go back to Washington here shortly, and when I see Members of the Congress as I work this issue, I am going to say, I spoke to the good folks of southern Illinois.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionmedicalliabilityreformcollinsvilleillinois", "title": "Remarks Following a Discussion on Medical Liability Reform in Collinsville, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussion-medical-liability-reform-collinsville-illinois", "publication_date": "05-01-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5461, "text": "What a job he is done. And to CPAC I actually started quite a while ago at CPAC, and came here probably made my first real political speech. And I enjoyed it so much that I came back for a second one, then a third. Then I said, what the hell, let us run for President. But it is wonderful to be back with so many great patriots, old friends, and brave young conservatives. What a future you have. Our movement and our future in our country is unlimited. What we have done together has never been done in the history maybe of beyond of country, maybe in the history of the world. They came from the mountains and the valleys and the cities. And what we did in 2016 the Election, we call it, with a capital E it is never been done before. And we are going to do it, I think, again in 2020, and the numbers are going to be even bigger. So you had 17 Republicans, plus me. And I was probably more of a conservative than a Republican. People just did not quite understand that. They did not understand it. I think now, with what we have done with the judiciary and so many other things, I think they get it very well. And it is driving the other side crazy. How many times did you hear, for months and months, There is no way to 270? You know what that means, right? They could not get me there. In fact, I actually went up to Maine to get one, and I did win the one. But we did not need the one. We did not need it. We won Maine. We won our half of Maine, remember? You have Nebraska. We won both in Nebraska. We won the half we had to win in Maine. So we got the one, but we did not need the one, because we did not get 270; we got 306 to 223. 223-306. A state called Wisconsin, a state called Michigan, where by the way, where Fiat Chrysler just announced a $4.5 billion incredible expansion and new plant, doubling their workforce. Many, many car companies have moved back to Michigan and are continuing to do so. So I think we are going to do even better in 2020. I think we are going to do numbers that people have not seen for a long time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5462, "text": "The men and women here today are on the frontlines of protecting America's interests, defending America's value, and reclaiming our nation's priceless heritage. With your help, we are reversing decades of blunders and betrayals. These are serious, serious betrayals to our nation and to everything we stand for. It is been done by the failed ruling class that enriched foreign countries at our expense. In many cases, it was America last. And the world knows it. When I meet with prime ministers, when I meet with presidents and I get along with them because they know that what is taken place over many years not just the Obama administration; long before that they cannot believe, themselves, that they got away with it. They cannot believe it. And they like me. And the reason they like me they tell me; they say, Mr. President I said as an example, President Xi of China, I have great respect. We have a great relationship. I say, How is it possible that you got away with this for so long? And he said, Because nobody ever asked us to change. When they charge 40 percent tariffs on our cars going into China, and we charge them nothing coming into our country; when they raise their tariff from 10 percent to 25 percent and then to 40 percent and they said to me, We expected that somebody would call and say you cannot do that. Nobody called, so we just left it. And I do not blame them. We should've been doing the same thing to them. Now we are negotiating with China. They would not negotiate with previous administrations. But I found some very old laws from when our country was rich really rich. The old tariff laws we had to dust them off; you could hardly see, they were so dusty. But I said, when we were doing the great things, what happened to those laws? And I checked, and I found 301 and 382. I found one, 1938, where we can do what we have to do. But, you know, they had a debate in it was really a tough time in our country because we had so much money we did not know what the hell to do with it. Mark Levin will look this up. And the problem is, with Mark, if I make a little mistake, he will let us know on Sunday night. I got to be very careful when I talk about this. But it was the Great Tariff Debate of 1888.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5463, "text": "We did not know what to do with all of the money we were making. And McKinley, prior to being President, he was very strong on protecting our assets, protecting our country. And he made statements that, Others cannot come into our country and steal our wealth and steal our jobs, and build their country and not defend our country. We cannot do that. You know I am totally off script right now. And this is how I got elected, by being off script. And if we do not go off script, our country is in big trouble, folks. Because we have to get it back. And when I look at what is happening on the other side, I encourage it. The Green New Deal, right? Green New Deal I encourage it. I think it is really something that they should promote. They have to go out and get it. But I will take the other side of that argument only because I am mandated to. But they should stay with that argument. When the wind stops blowing, that is the end of your electric. I'd like to watch television, darling. So the Great Tariff Debate of 1888 and then we had so much money we could do whatever we wanted. We built forces up that were incredible. Then, in 1913, they ended tariffs, okay? They ended tariffs. Somebody got stupid and they ended tariffs. I will not use a certain words because it is not politically but everybody knows the word I'd love to use. Should I use it? I will not do it. Our great First Lady always said, Do not use certain words, please. I said, But the audience wanted me to do it. She said, Do not do it. And the problem is, if I do do that, they will not put the little preamble that we just went through. They will just use the word, and they will said, Is not that terrible. So I will not use it. if you tell a joke, if you are sarcastic, if you are having fun with the audience, if you are on live television with millions of people and 25,000 people in an arena, and if you say something like, Russia, please, if you can, get us Hillary Clinton's emails. Please, Russia, please. So everybody is having a good time. I am laughing, we are all having fun. And then that fake CNN and others say, He asked Russia to go get the emails.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5464, "text": "I mean, I thought like, two weeks ago, I am watching and they are talking about one of the points. He asked Russia for the emails. And I am telling you, they know the game. They know the game, and they play it dirty dirtier than anybody has ever played the game. But the thing that we have done is very special. Because, on trade, and because of tariffs and I know there are people in the Republican Party and people really, even conservatives good conservatives they do not like tariffs. Do you think China would be sending their top representatives over? Right now, China is paying 25 percent tariff on $50 billion worth of technology goods. I was then going to charge them 25 percent on $200 billion. Not like $200 million that is a lot. This is 200 with a B billion. So but I was nice, because we are having a very strong negotiation, which if it were not for tariffs and I tell this to President Xi; this is nothing to hide. I would never be talking like this because, in theory, it could hurt your negotiating position. But in my case, it cannot , because it is true. I was nice, and I left it at 10 percent on $200 billion. We have lost so much money with China $500 billion a year. And on trade, it is such a disaster; it is $507 billion a year. We lose with everybody, almost. I have $250 billion more to put tariffs on. Billions of dollars, right now, are pouring into our Treasury. And for those of you that have not done the research, if you look, of the 25 percent, our country as it is turned out, because it is now been on there for a long while. Our and I am in no rush because I am fine with it. I am fine with it. Of the 25 points, we have paid for 4 points, and China has paid for 21 points. You know, everyone said, Oh, it is a tax on our It is not really. And what China and other countries do sometimes is they will subsidize it. But what it is, beyond everything else, I can negotiate. But then you have senators and a few congressman, but not Mark Meadows. Mark and Jim Jordan, and I want to name every one of those couple of hundred people. Because we do have a lot. I want to name every damn one of them. And I just see Mark in the audience.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5465, "text": "They have been fighting with Deb, much more important. He would be nowhere without her. But they fight so hard on this witch hunt, this phony deal that they put together; this phony thing that now looks like it is dying. So they do not have anything with Russia. So now they go and morph into, Let us inspect every deal he is ever done. We are going to go into his finances. We are going to check his deals. I saw little Shifty Schiff yesterday. He went into a meeting and he said, We are going to look into his finances. I said, Where did that come from? He always talked about Russia collusion with Russia. So now we are waiting for a report, and we will find out whether or not, and who we are dealing with. We are waiting for a report by people that were not elected. We had the greatest election in all fairness, I used to hear Andrew Jackson. This was now greater than the election of Andrew Jackson. People say that. No, people say it. I am not saying it. You know, they used to go to Ronald Reagan, when I first started. The key is in the color. The key is what it says. Make America Great Again, is what it says. But we had the greatest of all time. Now we have people that lost. And unfortunately, you put the wrong people in a couple of positions, and they leave people for a long time that should not be there. And, all of a sudden, they are trying to take you out with bullshit. Now, Robert Mueller never received a vote, and neither did the person that appointed him. And as you know, the Attorney General says, I am going to recuse myself. And I said, why the hell did not he tell me that before I put him in? How do you recuse yourself? But the person that appointed Robert Mueller never received a vote. Robert Mueller put 13 of the angriest Democrats in the history of our country on the commission. Now, how do you do that? You take a look at them. One of them was involved with the Hillary Clinton Foundation, running it. Another one has perhaps the worst reputation of any human being I have ever seen. In fact, it would've been actually better for them if they put half and half, and Mueller can do whatever he wants anyway, which he will probably do. But we have conflicts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5466, "text": "I had a nasty business transaction with Robert Mueller a number of years ago. He wanted the job as FBI Director. I mean, these are things that are out there; they know it. Why is not that and I did not give it to him. And those are a few of the conflicts. Other than that, it is wonderful. I thought of it this morning, Mark. And I heard you made an incredible speech and statement today. And I was on the way. But I will see it later. I guarantee I will be watching it later. I have one of the great inventions in history. I think it is actually better than television, because television is practically useless without TiVo, right? But I will be watching it later, Mark. But people that got no votes. But I heard this morning, President Trump is waiting for the Mueller report. So the Attorney General recuses himself, and I do not fire him. If you use your right, if you use your power, if you use Article 2, it is called obstruction. So the Attorney General is weak and ineffective, and he does not do what he should've done. Somebody that never got a vote writes a powerful letter horrible about Comey. Every Republican said everybody in fact, when I fired Comey, I said, You know First Lady I said, Melania, I am doing something today. I am doing it because it really has to be done. That is been proven now with all of the emails and the texts. I am doing something that has to be done. But you know the good news? Every Democrat hates him. Every Republican hates him. He did a horrible job at the FBI. Because the people in the FBI are incredible people not the sleaze on top. And I said to the First Lady I said, But you know the good news? Everyone is going to love it. So we fire Comey. And Schumer who called for his resignation many times Podesta, I believe that day because he still has not gotten over getting his ass kicked, okay? I believe that day called for his resignation. He called for the Comey resignation. Others almost every, I would say. Mark, would you say virtually every Democrat, virtually every I cannot think of anybody that said he is doing a good job. So I said to Melania, Melania, the good news, this will be a popular thing. And I fire a bad cop. I fire a dirty cop.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5467, "text": "And all of a sudden, the Democrats say, How dare he fire him. How dare he do this. We are in this swamp of Washington, D.C. So, just to finish and I will tell you, Matt Schlapp is loving this. You know, normally you read a few pages and you say, Bye, folks. But you know what I like about this? Number one, I am in love, and you are in love. We are all in love together. We have done something that nobody has ever done. You know, a great friend of mine from New York, he is a stone-cold killer. He is actually not even a good friend of mine because he'd turn on me in two seconds if it was. And he said, What are you going to speak about today? Like, what are you going to speak? He said, I just heard that you have the biggest crowd in the history of CPAC. They are in many hotel rooms all over the place. You are just better at real estate than they are. But this guy you all know his name very rich guy. And he has a problem with a thing called public speaking. If he has to speak to more than like five people, he chokes. He kills people for a living meaning mentally and financially but if there is like an audience of nine, it is like augh. So he said to me, How the hell do you do that? And the reason it is easy I really mean this there is so much love in this room, it is easy to talk. You can talk your heart out. You can talk your heart out. And we have had that from the day I came down with your First Lady on the escalator in Trump Tower. We never had an empty seat. We went out and helped Ted Cruz. We went out and helped so many people. If we did not do those 32 rallies and it was not easy. When you are doing rallies with 25-, 30,000 people in Texas, we had 109,000 people sign up. We used the Houston Rockets arena; it holds 22,000. We were sending notices, Please do not come. We never had an empty seat.  He wrote an article. He took pictures of an empty arena. He then put out a note something to the effect, Not very good crowd size, Mr. President. And I never saw it because I do not follow the guy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5468, "text": "But thousands of people that were in that arena that was packed with 25,000 people outside that could not get in he got there four or five hours early because he does not fly private. And maybe it is because of the carbon footprint. He just does not want private. And, you know, the place had not started taking in people. They were not going to take them in. And, you know, whatever it was 18,000 when you have nobody, it is a little scary-looking. So he took pictures. We had people sitting on the stairwells. We had people sitting in every seat. I do not think we have had an empty seat since we announced. And from the day we came down the escalator, I really do not believe we have had an empty seat at any arena, at any stadium. And that is why I say this has never, ever happened before, and now we have to verify it in 2020 with an even bigger victory. And, by the way, just to finish that story, the great Sarah Huckabee and Mercedes, who is incredible, sitting right here Mercedes, thank you. They always say, Do not bring it up. If I do not explain it, how are they going to understand? And the Washington Post had to do and this particular writer had to do a I thought he was going to get fired. I mean, if that were a conservative, he would've been fired on the spot. He would've been humiliated for what he did. Nobody was in the arena. There were thousands outside but they had not opened the gates yet. They did the same thing at our big inauguration speech. You take a look at those crowds. And I watched one of the evening shows that are ridiculous, how horrible they are, how mean how horrible. And I watched it by mistake. And they showed they showed from the White House all the way down. They showed from the Cap- they showed there were people. Nobody has ever seen it. But I saw pictures that there were no people. And they always mention crowd size. He talks about crowd size. So I am constantly bugging Mercedes. Whenever we have a slow moment, I say, Mercedes and Sarah show them the pictures. And compare them with what they put on television. But we had fencing all the way down to the Washington Monument. In fact, it is probably, with the men I know, it is actually easier for the women to make the walk, right?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5469, "text": "They had to walk with high heels, in many cases. They had to walk all the way down to the Washington Monument and then back. And I looked, and I made a speech, and I said, before I got on I said to the people that were sitting next to me, I have never seen anything like this. We had a crowd I have never seen anything like it. And I have to live I have to live with crowd size. But I saw a picture just the other night of practically no people. It was taken hours before our great day. That was a great day for us. So what I am going to do is I will give it to the great one. I will give it to Mark Levin. And I will give him the picture. Then I will show you where they showed, just the other day, an empty field like nobody on it. And you will see the sun. And you can have some fun. You are going to get big ratings on your show, I will tell you that. I knew that, actually. All right, now let us get back to what I am here for. You know, somebody said, Oh, the speech you made, sir, the State of the Union speech was incredible. And I said I said I did; I got great reviews, even from some of the really bad ones out there. Of course, by the following morning, they had to change because the head people called up, What are you doing? A lot of it is not the people on television, you know. A lot of it is their bosses which someday we are going to have to figure out why, Meadows, why that is. Because, you know, if you are building a great country, you have the best employment and unemployment numbers we have ever had. More people are working today in the United States than ever before in the history of our country. And you say, why are they upset by that? Why are they upset by that? We have slashed 30,000 pages of job-killing regulations from the Federal Register. That is an all-time record in the history of the United States, even by Presidents there for eight years, and in one case more. We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history. And we got rid of the individual mandate, which was a big deal. Which should lead to the ending of the disaster known as Obamacare.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5470, "text": "The great state of Texas has a case, and it was literally based on the individual mandate. Now that it is gone, I do not know how they rule against it. But that'll soon be up in the Supreme Court of the United States, I hope. And then we are going to get together with the Democrats and come up with really great healthcare, okay? And of the other things we did in our tax package is ANWR. And I did not want to get it approved for a certain reason, because I thought somebody treated me very badly. And I said, you know, I do not want to get it. Then I get a call from a friend of mine, and he is in the oil business. He is not asking for anything. He said but he really is a knowledgeable guy when it comes to oil and gas. He said to me, Hey and they all call me Mr. President. I have friends that, for 35 years, Hey, Don, how you doing? I love you, Donny. I have a friend a very rich guy Richard LeFrak, in New York. He calls me all my life, Hey, Don, how you doing? I have known this guy so long from kindergarten. And now I get a call the other day, Mr. President, how are you, sir? You have known me for I do not want to say, because I do not want my wife to hear the number. Richard came up; he said, I have known your husband for 65 years. I said, Do not say that. I say, Say 25, 30. But I said, Richard Richard, call me 'Donald', like you always do. He gets his breath. Two minutes later Mr. President That is called respect for the office, right? And that was not in the script either, Mark. But we are renegotiating, right now, horrible trade deals that we are cracking down and we are really doing a number cracking down on countries that cheat, and standing up for the American worker for the first time in many, many decades. A country announces they are closing their plant in Michigan or Pennsylvania or Ohio they are closing. They are closing a plant; they are going to move to Mexico. They are going to move to China. They fire all their workers. And then they sell their cars, no tax; just make them in Mexico, sell them back to here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5471, "text": "And in the new deal with Mexico and Canada, called the USMCA, it is very, very hard prohibitively hard for a company to fire its 4,000 workers and move to Mexico or some other location. It is now a very costly they can do it, I guess, if they want. It used to be almost I said I used to I have been talking about this for a long time. I used to say it is almost like we are giving them an incentive to leave our country. Again, I am for America first. That was not for America first. And we have great companies that are now moving back to our country. And, by the way, you know I am building the wall. We are finishing the wall. We got a lot of money. It is in the thing. But and there will be some people in the room that do not like this. We are down to 3.7 percent unemployment the lowest number in a long time. I got all these companies moving in. They need workers. We have to bring people into our country to work these great plants that are opening up all over the place. This was not necessarily what I was saying during the campaign because I never knew we would be as successful as we have been. Companies are roaring back into our country, and now we want people to come in. We need workers to come in, but they have got to come in legally, and they have got to come in through merit, merit, merit. They have got to come in through merit. They have to be people that can help us. They have to be people that can love our country, not hate our country. We have people in Congress right now, we have people in Congress that hate our country. And you know that. And we can name every one of them if they want. They hate our country. When I see some of the things being made, the statements being made, it is very, very sad. Very, very and find out, how did they do in their country? Just ask them, how did they do? Somebody would say, Oh, that is terrible that he brings that up. I will bring it up. How did they do in their country? But we need workers. We have to bring in workers. One other thing because we have a lot of people here that are important people in terms of votes. We have some senators. We have some congressmen.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5472, "text": "When a senator tells us that he is a free trader, so am I. But when a senator said we cannot do tariffs, where we make a fortune, or at a minimum, we are able to use this tremendous power that I found tremendous old stuff. I am able to use it, at a minimum, to negotiate great and fair trade deals. They would not even be talking to us because it is so one-sided. Last year, we lost eight hundred this for many years almost $800 billion on trade. You cannot do that. And now we are making great trade deals. But when some of the senators good people; I think they are good people. I just do not understand the thinking. They charge us a lot. When we send a motorcycle to India, it is 100 percent tariff. They charge 100 percent. When India sends a motorcycle to us, we brilliantly charge them nothing. So I want a reciprocal tax, or at least I want to charge a tax. I have had a lot of people Lindsey Graham. It is not the thing that he is most adept at. I said, Lindsey, if they charge us a hundred, I'd like a reci- If they charge us, we charge them. He goes, That makes sense to me. And then he gets on to judiciary and things that, frankly, he likes and finds very interesting. It took me about a minute, which is a long time. I did a bad description. They charge 100; we charge nothing. Now we have reciprocal, so it is 100. But what happens now, for those that really think about tariffs and do not like tariffs for whatever reason might be and that is okay. What is going to happen is, in many cases, instead of 100 and 100, you are going to have zero and zero, so you will not have any tariff. But you have to you have to start working on some of the senators that say I cannot approve this deal. I want to just charge India as an example, I am using it. I mean, nobody nobody knows it because nobody knows what they are doing in Washington. But India is a very, very high-tariff nation, and they charge tremendous tremendous numbers. So they charge 100. So I say, I am not going to charge 100, but I am going to charge 25 percent. And I hear this turmoil in the Senate because we are charging 25. So I call a couple of the guys up.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5473, "text": "I say, Fellas, listen, they are charging us 100 for the exact same product. I want to charge them 25. And I feel so foolish charging 25 because it should be 100. But I am doing 25 only because of you. I want to get your support. Where do these people come from? Where do they come from? Where do they come from? I need your help. I need your help the voters' help. Where do they come from? So it can only be one of two or three things. And I even like some of them. So we take that out of the equation. So even and I know they do not have evil intentions. And the other thing could be, I guess, maybe you know, these companies are all owned by people, and these people are very generous. Because we are talking about our country. We cannot allow a country to charge 100 percent and we get nothing for the same exact product. For one thing, they do not respect us. They do not respect us. The world respects our country again. They respect us. Plus, we have a gentleman that likes raising interest rates in the Fed. We have a gentleman that loves quantitative tightening in the Fed. We have a gentleman that likes a very strong dollar in the Fed. So with all of those things and we want a strong dollar, but let us be reasonable. You understand that. With all of that, we are doing great. Can you imagine if we left interest rates where they were? Can you imagine if we left interest rates where they were? If we did not do quantitative tightening, taking money out of the market? If we did not do quantitative and this would lead to a little bit lower dollar. I want a strong dollar, but I want a dollar that is going to be great for our country, not a dollar that is so strong that it is prohibitive for us to be dealing with other nations and taking their business. Since the election, we have created a number that if I would have said during the campaign, the fake news just back there would have said this is crazy. 5.3 million new jobs, including over, now, 600,000 beautiful, brand-new manufacturing jobs that were never going to come back to our country. These are jobs that were never coming back to our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5474, "text": "Not to talk badly about the other administration, but if that theory went forward with Crooked Hillary winning the election, instead of being up almost 50 percent with the stock market, you would have been down 50 percent. We have nearly 5 million Americans that have been lifted off of food stamps. The unemployment rate has reached the lowest in over 51 years. And African American and you have heard me say this many times Hispanic American, Asian American unemployment rates are at their all-time historic lows. And African American income has reached an all-time high. So when I am on the debate stage with one of these maniacs I mean, trains to Hawaii. How do you get to Europe? We have not figured that one out yet. We do not use airplanes anymore. You saw what I am doing in California, right? They have a fast train. The fast train goes from San Francisco to Los Angeles. It is over budget by hundreds of billions of dollars, so they have a great idea the new governor; nice guy. When I am with him face to face, nice. When he speaks about me, not so nice. But face to face, he loves me. He called me up. You are doing a great job. So he will probably deny it, but check the phone records at the White House. I think they need some forest money, because honestly, the management of the forests is very bad and that is one of the problems they have. I said, You got to get those forests. We cannot keep spending billions and billions and losing hundreds of lives, more importantly. When a tree falls, you cannot let the environmentalist say you cannot take that tree out. It becomes like a matchstick, that tree. It hits a flame, it goes up. The leaves every once in a while, you have to remove the leaves because they are so a guy smoking a cigarette, he throws it away, he does not mean it. The thing catches on fire and we lose 400,000 acres and people are killed. You got to have management. But he called me up the other day, recently let us say four weeks ago or so. He said, I just want to tell you you are a great President and you are one of the smartest people I have ever met. That is what he said. Now, that is what he said. Will he admit it? No, I doubt it. But that is what he said. And you are doing a great job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5475, "text": "And then he did start talking about, in all fairness, additional money for the fire, which is it is okay. We have great talks. I mean, I like him. I like him. But they say things you know, politicians, they say things to your face, and then you see two days later they are giving a news conference just like, where did that guy come from? Where did he come from? But everyone in this great country, right now, because of our great new economy, is doing well except, of course, for the Never Trumpers. But they are on mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. You have Never Trumpers; you have certain hardline. Whether you like me or not if my name is Smith instead of Trump, and if you told him I put in over 100 federal judges it'll soon be 145 federal judges and 2 Supreme Court judges. And 17 appellate division judges. That we have got the best economy maybe in our history. That we have got the best employment numbers and unemployment numbers in our history. That we have cut more regulations in two years than any President has ever done, whether it is for eight or beyond. That we have taken care of our military with $1.7 billion. Think of what we did. Think of what we did with our military. Think of the numbers that we have for our military. We have numbers nobody has ever heard of these numbers before. And you know, part of the problem that we have because I am a cost cutter. But we have to take care of our military. Now, I have no choice. I'd like to spend much less. Obama was spending much less but our military was being depleted. He was fighting in endless wars; they'd never end. And, by the way, as of probably today or tomorrow, we will actually have 100 percent of the caliphate in Syria. And we will leave a small group of guys and gals. But we want to bring our people back home. We want to bring our people back home. We were going to be in Syria for four months. We want to fix our country. We want to fix our bridges, our highways, our roads, our schools. We want to fix our country up. But I was told by a general, who I had to fire I said, General, how long before we get 100 percent of the caliphate? I said, I cannot take it two years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5476, "text": "And then I flew to Iraq; first time I left the White House because I stayed in the White House for months and months because I wanted the Democrats to get back from their vacations from Hawaii and these other places. And I figured it would look good if I stayed in the White House so that you people all love me and vote for me, okay? So I stayed in the White House. I was there I told my wife, Go to Florida. I stayed for Thanksgiving. I said I mean, I was in the White House for a long time. I had cabin fever in the White House. But if you have got to have cabin fever, that is the place to do it, okay? But I was there, I do not know, for a number of months, through Christmas. I spent my New Year's all by myself. All it was me and about 500 men and women outside with machine guns. I never saw so many beautiful-looking machine guns. I'd look at that equipment and I'd say, Man They sit in the trees. They sit on the lawn. I told people, I am in this mess you know, people do not know how big the White House. First of all, it is one of the most beautiful places in the world. It is really I made a lot of money with luxury. This building is 1799 which, of course, when President Xi comes, I say 1799, like it is old. To him, that is like a brand-new house in China. In China, they go back they go back 8,000 years. But I sat in the White House for months and months, except I took a day off. I flew to a lovely place called Iraq, and I flew at night and I got there at night. And I said to myself, this is interesting, because they say, Sir, all of the lights in the plane, sir, are going off. I said, What about the shades? Well, we want it better than that. So we turned the lights off, put the shades down. And I have landed; I like to sit with pilots. I respect people that know what they are doing, and these are the best in the world. These are the best in the world. And the pilot says, Sir, we are landing in approximately one and a half minutes. I say, I do not see it. I have pretty good vision. At least for my age I have good vision.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5477, "text": "I guess for my age I have great vision. But I do not have vision like a 35-year-old captain. Should we lift off and try it again? We spent $7 trillion in the Middle East and we cannot land with the lights on 20 years later. Seven trillion dollars and we have to fly in with no lights. But I met some incredible people. I met some incredible people generals. One of them came from Syria the operation in Syria. And I was upset with my generals because they were not getting it finished. I want to bring our people back home. So I met generals I did not know. I mean, these generals there is no person in Hollywood that could play the role. I said, Raisin, like the fruit? I said, You got to be kidding me. Just like I did with Mattis when I said, We are going to give you a new nickname, because 'Chaos' is not a good nickname. So we changed his name. So what happened is I flew to Iraq. I wanted to meet the people on the site, because I learn more sometimes from soldiers, what is going on, than I do from generals. I hate to say it. And I tell that to the generals all the time. Because I meet and I land in this airport, the most incredible thing. We must have spent $3 billion building it. It is one of the reasons I do not want to leave Iraq so fast. I said, Well, how do we leave this thing? So I have Raisin Caine and three other generals, colonels, sergeants. And I said, Bring the cameras. I am going to make a movie. And I said to the generals, Listen, we got to get out. I want to know why is it going to take two years to knock off 2 or 3 or 4 percent, which is what we had left. And I said, Tell me why it will not . If we attack them in a different manner, we can do it much faster. Okay, General Raisin Caine, how fast can Sir, we can have it totally finished in one week. I said, One week? We are only hitting them from a temporary base in Syria. But if you gave us permission, we could hit them from the back, from the side, from all over from the base that you are right on, right now, sir. They will not know what the hell hit them. They will not know what the hell hit them, sir.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5478, "text": "And I said, Why did not my other generals tell me that? Why did not they tell me that? I said, Did you tell them that? They come in from Washington, sir. We have to take orders. You are the first one to ask us our opinion. So I went back and I said, I am going to get back to you soon, Raisin. I like you, Raisin Caine. But I did say I said, Well, hey, listen, we are in Iraq. Is not that very far away from I was here in a very short time, sir. Of course, he is taking a plane that goes 2,000 miles an hour, you know. What you learn from being on the site my father was a builder. He always used to say, Nobody ever got rich by sitting behind their desk. He'd say, You got to be on this site. You got to be with the contractors. You got to see if they are ripping you off. You have got to collect every nail that is dropped, every piece of wood. You can sell it. You got to be on the site. You got to see while they are building, while they are under construction, is that wall straight or if it is crooked. And you have to fix it before they build it, not after they build it, when you rip everything down. You do not get rich by sitting behind a desk. So I did not want to do that. And I am in the White House and I was lonely. I said, Let us go to Iraq. And I had a hell of a meeting in Iraq. And I will tell you, those generals not just Raisin Caine, General Caine. They knew their stuff. And it is true I mean, you talk central casting. They had a master sergeant. I could take him right now, bring him to Hollywood, make a military movie, and he is the star of the movie. They brought a man in a sergeant, a drill sergeant to teach some actor how to be a drill sergeant. The drill sergeant was so incredible that he ended up starring in the movie, and he should have gotten the Academy Award, by the way, but he did not . That is because Hollywood discriminates against our people. You know the movie I am talking about, right? You know the movie.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5479, "text": "But while we are making great strides, and our country is doing as well and maybe, in many ways, better than it is ever done before Democrat lawmakers are now embracing socialism. They want to replace individual rights with total government domination. Just this week, more than 100 Democrats in Congress signed up for a socialist takeover of American healthcare. Their radical government-run plan if you call it that would lead to colossal tax increases increases like you have never seen before and take away private coverage from over 180 million Americans. And we have some great private coverage, and we have initiated some incredible plans, like the new cooperative plan, where you get better insurance than Obamacare for a fraction of the cost. But perhaps nothing is more extreme than the Democrats' plan to completely takeover American energy and completely destroy America's economy through their new $100 trillion Green New Deal. Under the Green New Deal which somebody described as a high school term paper written by a poor student it is true. Who would believe it? But I do not I will be honest with you, folks. I said you know, it is Saturday morning, and I said, Matt, should we do a little more, like, spend time? He said, Yeah, would you do that? I have not seen anybody. If Mark Levin gets up and leaves, I will finish very quickly, because then I know. I watch those doors. Because a lot of times a lot of times well, one time, the press said people left. They showed two empty seats in a stadium of 19,000. They showed two empty seats. The people left right in front of me, and I said, Oh, man, maybe this is not a good job I am doing. They went to the bathroom. And a certain fake news deal showed a picture on the front page of these two empty seats. They said Trump had empty seats. We never have empty seats. The Green New Deal would completely abolish the American oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear power industries, of which we are now the leader in the world. We are the biggest now in the world because of moves that I have made. And we are trying to speed up pipelines in Texas, which would have taken 15 years. We need pipeline approval. We are going to have it very quickly. We will pick up 30 to 40 percent more. Their plan would remove every gas-powered car from American roads.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5480, "text": "They want you to have one car instead of two, and it should be electric, okay? I think the auto industry is not going to do too well under this plan. What do you think, Meadows? I think maybe maybe you are going to see some bad stock prices if that passes. It would end air travel. But you will get on a train, do not worry about it. You just have to cross off about 95 percent of the world. And it would force the destruction or renovation of virtually every existing structure in the United States. New York City would have to rip down buildings and rebuild them again. This is the craziest plan, and yet I see senators that are there for 20 years white hair. See, I do not have white hair. I do not have white hair. No, I see these white-haired, longtime senators standing behind this young woman, and she is ranting and raving like a lunatic. Yes, I agree with this. She is like she is like a crazed person. What she said about men is so bad. What she said about men is so bad. But she is standing in the hallway. And she did not know too much about the plan because she is you know, she cannot understand that plan. Now, this is the senator from Hawaii, and they are saying to her, What do you think? Well, I do not know how people are going to get to Hawaii, but I am in favor of the plan. I do not get it. I do not get it. I do not get it. So she is in favor of the plan, but you will not be able to get to well, we can take boats, I guess. We will go back to boats. This is the new Democrat platform for the and I do not want to talk them out of it. I got to get off this subject. I want them to embrace this plan. I want them to go and sell this plan. I just want to be the Republican that runs against them for that. I am going to regret this speech. This speech should have been delivered one year from now, not now, damn it. Because they are going to grab out together, and they are going to say, You know, this guy is really laying for us. I should've saved the Pocahontas thing for another year. Because I have destroyed her political career, and now I will not get a chance to run against her, and I would've loved it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5481, "text": "We got to you know, I do not want to knock out all of the good stuff and end up with somebody that is actually got talent. So I do like the Green New Deal. I respect it greatly. It should be part of the dialogue of the next election. And I think it has tremendous promise and tremendous potential for the future of our country. Socialism is not about the environment. It is not about justice. It is not about virtue. Socialism is about only one thing. It is called power for the ruling class. Look at what is happening in Venezuela and so many other places. All of us are here today because we know that the future does not belong to those who believe in socialism. And I heard, yesterday, a great speech from our Vice President Mike Pence, talking about this very subject and talking about it beautifully. The future belongs to those who believe in freedom. America will never be a socialist country ever. Young Americans I love young Americans. And, Charlie, what a job you are doing. Because he has done an incredible job. But young Americans like you are leading the revival of American liberty, sovereignty, and self-determination in the face of left-wing intolerance. The anger the unbelievable anger I see it every day. Fortunately, for you, it is mostly pointed at me. You have the courage to speak the truth, to do what is right, and to fight for what you believe, and keep doing it. We reject oppressive speech codes, censorship, political correctness, and every other attempt by the hard left to stop people from challenging ridiculous and dangerous ideas. Instead, we believe in free speech, including online and including on campus. I turned on my television the other day, and I saw somebody that was violently punched in the face. By a bully I'd like to do a lot of things. But, of course, we would never do that. Because if I ever said violence, they would say, Donald Trump attacked. I am sure he is a lovely young man; just had a little temper tantrum. I have been there before with those people. I do not want to do it again. So, at the Leadership Institute, we are committed to making campuses great again. And I thank you so much for bringing me up here to let me speak.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5482, "text": "It is great it is great that I am being recognized, and but there is so many conservative students across the country who are facing discrimination, harassment, and worse, if they dare to speak up on campus. So I am glad that we could we could, you know, bring this to the forefront. And I'd just like to say, you know, if these socialist progressives had their way, they would put our Constitution through the paper shredder in a heartbeat. So, you know, it is as important now than ever the work at Leadership Institute and Campus Reform you know, exposing these liberal abuses to the public it is as important now as ever. And these students these students do it because they have a love of our nation and freedom, and frankly, a love for you, Mr. President. I was going to call him, but I do not have to now. I see him here. I learned a number of things. First of all, he can take a punch. If Muhammad Ali could take a punch, he can take a punch. Because you were not going to go down no matter how that was a hell of a hard punch. You have got yourself a great lawyer. I know your lawyer. But he is probably got nothing, but sue him forever. Ladies and gentlemen, he took a hard punch in the face for all of us. He took a punch for all of us. He is going to be a very wealthy young man. Today I am proud to announce that I will be very soon signing an executive order requiring colleges and universities to support free speech if they want federal research dollars. If they want our dollars, and we give it to them by the billions, they have got to allow people like Hayden and many other great young people, and old people, to speak. Every day, we are restoring common sense and the timeless values that unite us all. We believe in the Constitution and the rule of law. We believe in the First Amendment right. And we believe in religious liberty. And we believe strongly in the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms which is under siege, folks. They have a lot of plans. It is under siege. But I will protect you, I promise you that. I will protect you. Because it all has to come through my office. And we hopefully are going to be here for six more years, so you are in good shape. We believe in the American Dream, not in the socialist nightmare. In God We Trust.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5483, "text": "Every day, my presidency will defend American families. We will defend America's workers our great, great cherished workers that now we are taking care of. They are not losing their jobs. We are creating those jobs. We are not letting those companies destroy their lives anymore. We will defend the American way of life, and we will always defend America's borders. Because without borders, as I have said many times before, we do not have a country. The lawless chaos on our southern border provides a lucrative cash flow to some of the most dangerous criminal organizations on the planet. Deadly cartels constantly daily, hourly violate our borders to flood our cities with drugs that kill thousands and thousands of our citizens violently. What are these people talking about when they talk about the border? I do not like it. But I have to tell you, our Border Patrol, our ICE agents, our law enforcement, the job they do and they do not have the backup of a wall, in many cases the job they do is incredible. These ruthless cartels terrorize innocent communities on both sides of the border and spread instability throughout our hemisphere. When I was there two weeks ago, 26 people were killed very close to where I was, on the Rio Grande. And the paper does not write about it. The news does not write about it. In the last two years alone, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests. Think of what that means. I am talking they went out and arrested 266,000 people who have criminal records and, in some cases, for murder. Who the hell wants to do that? Thank God they are doing it because I do not want to do it. But they love our country, and they are tough people, but they love our country. These are people that ICE is going in and getting, and either putting in jail or ideally bringing them back to other countries and letting them put in jail, because we do not want them. We do not want to have to pay for them for 50 years. You want them to pay a price, but we do not want to have to pay for them for 50 years. And all the nonsense you hear about the people that come in illegally are far better than the people we have it is not true, folks. One recent study from FAIR F-A-I-R found that illegal aliens are incarcerated at three times the rate of legal residents. And if you look at prison population in federal prisons, these federal prisons are the number is staggering.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5484, "text": "The number of illegals far, far, far greater than any proportion of our population. But you do not hear that; you hear like these people are the greatest people in the world. But the simple reality is that every crime committed by an illegal immigrant is a crime that should never have happened in the first place. Vicious coyotes, smugglers, and human traffickers prey upon innocent women and children. One in three women is sexually assaulted on the dangerous journey north. When I ran for president, my first speech, I mentioned the word rape. The press went after me; I could not believe it. I said, Will it be like this always? From day one, I mention the word rape. If you look at that speech, that was so innocent compared to what is really happening. That was a very innocent speech compared to the real facts. Mothers who love their daughters, when their daughters are getting ready to make that 2,000-mile trek up through Mexico and frankly, I wish Mexico would stop them at their northern border, at our I wish Mexico would stop them. Because you know, they have a border. They call it their southern border. It is 2,000 miles down from our southern border. I wish Mexico would stop them. But they have their own difficulties. Frankly, I understand that. We are working along well with them. And they are doing a lot of things to help us with asylum and other elements of what we are doing. But mothers, who love their daughters, give them massive amounts of birth control pills because they know their daughters are going to be raped on the way up to our southern border. Those caravans you look at those caravans, and some are phenomenal people. But in those caravans you have stone-cold killers. You had the interview done by some innocent person who I think is actually back there now. And what is it that you want asylum for? Why are you coming to America? And when those caravans are formed, do you think those countries that we used to give a lot of money to I have cut it way back. I have cut it way back. Do you think they are giving us, as we say, their best and their finest? Oh, let us send our best people up to America. Let us have our best people go in the caravan so we can give America our greatest people. They give us some very bad people. They want to keep their good people because they are smart.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5485, "text": "Border Patrol recently reported apprehending 7,000 unlawful migrants in a single week on just one part of the Texas border, a couple of weeks ago. Our immigration system is stretched far beyond the breaking point. To confront this national security crisis, last month I declared a national emergency. And when I see these people and they are good people some senators, mostly I tell you, the House has been fantastic. The House you know, backing we have had from the House has really been I am talking about in the last short period of time. There is a lot of spirit in the House, and I think in the Senate too, but we are going to have to see because we have a vote coming up. And a lot of people talk about precedent. That if we do this, the Democrats will use national emergency powers for something that we do not want. They are going to do that anyway, folks. The best way to stop that is to make sure that I win the election. That is the best way to stop that. They are going to do it anyway. They will do it anyway. I watch good people, they are friends of mine, We are very concerned with setting precedent. We are very concerned about setting precedent. I am very concerned with having murderers and drug traffickers, and drugs and drug cartels, pouring into our country. That is what I am concerned about. And the Democrats, they are going to do whatever they do if they get into power, and it will not have a damn thing to do with whether or not we approve our national emergency. Because let me tell you they do not like it when I say it but we are being invaded. We are being invaded by drugs, by people, by criminals. And we have to stop it. And we want people to come in, as I said before, but they have to come in legally and with merit. Previous presidents have used their national emergency power to promote democratic elections in Belarus, to ensure political stability in Burundi, and to defend the sovereignty of Lebanon. In Lebanon it is good. But we need it right here in our country. We have to use it for our country. Many emergency declarations have been used to protect people in faraway nations and distant lands. Now we are protecting, finally, our people. And we are proudly standing with the heroes of ICE and Border Patrol and law enforcement. Illegal immigration is also deeply unfair to American workers and taxpayers, including millions and millions of hardworking legal immigrants.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5486, "text": "If you care about helping immigrants and care about their success, if you care about reducing poverty and raising living standards, then you must support a safe, strong, and very, very secure border. We need an immigration policy that helps all Americans thrive, flourish, prosper. We need an immigration policy that is going to be great for our corporations and our great companies. We need an immigration policy where people coming into our country can love our country and love our fellow citizens. And this includes shutting down sanctuary cities. And we want to end catch-and-release. We catch them, we realize they are a criminal, and we have to release them. They come onto our land, they put one foot on our land. We now have to take them through a massive court trial. Who does this? Other countries say, Get the hell out of here. We have to take them through court. So we catch them. We talk to them. If they are criminals, or if they are not, we release them. We say, Come back for a hearing in front of a judge. You know how many judges you need to do this? Three percent of the people come back for a trial. Not my fault I inherited this mess, but we are fixing it. We have to end chain migration, and we have to cancel the visa lottery. Every American, no matter where they are born, will benefit from the creation of a lawful immigration system. It is such you talk about an emergency. It is laughed at all over the world. We have people pouring in from not just the southern border in Mexico. They have a baby on our land. And then the parents come in with the baby because the baby is a citizen. They used to call it anchor babies but they do not use that term anymore because it does not sound nice. But one by one, we are finding ways. You know, they call them loopholes. A lot of our laws loopholes. Well, I am finding loopholes to get around the loophole. The Democrats in Congress do not want to touch any of it. Visa lottery that is where they put in the names; they put it in a lottery, and you pick, Oh, here is a wonderful person. You know, he killed four people. And then they get in and we say, Gee, that person just came into our country. He just robbed a store and killed somebody. Because they send us the people they do not want.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5487, "text": "The biggest form of subsidy we give to other nations. Immigration systems that prioritize the admission of those who can support themselves financially and contribute. We want people that can help themselves, that can support themselves. We support them from the day they come in until the day they die. We cannot do that as a country. We cannot afford to do that as a country. Sadly, on immigration and so many other issues, Democrat lawmakers have totally abandoned the American mainstream. But that is going to be good for us in 2020. They are embracing open borders, socialism, and extreme late-term abortion. Weeks ago, lawmakers in New York cheered as they passed legislation to allow babies to be ripped from the womb of their mother right up to the very moment of death. Then, in an act and a statement, the likes of which I do not think I have ever heard, in Virginia, the governor a Democrat stated that he would allow babies to be born, to be born outside. He would wrap them. He would take care of them. And then he will talk to the mother and the father as to what to be done. And if they did not want the child, who is now outside of the womb long outside of the womb they will execute the baby after birth. They will execute the baby after birth. This is a radical agenda by the Democrats. And when you put something up, as was just put up before the Senate, everybody on the Democrat side votes for it. They are lousy politicians and they have lousy policy. They have policy I could never sell if I wanted to. And the Republicans do not remember that. They vote in blocs. They have 47. We had a tremendous victory. We were given no credit. I cannot go and campaign for all of the people in the House. And guys like Meadows wins by so many points he does not need any help. He does not need it. I say, Mark, do you need any help? He will win by 30, 35. The ones that love Trump, the ones that are really the Trumpers like Meadows, Jordan, Gates, so many of them. I do not want to I could just name so many. They are the ones that win with that. I mean, it is like they do not even have an election. It is the ones that sort of they are a little shy about embracing what we are all about, they get clobbered.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5488, "text": "But the good news is they are all starting to find that out. Just this week, Senate Democrats opposed legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children who survive abortions. Virtually every Democrat voted against protecting these precious babies. They vote in groups. And we did have that great victory. We won for 51. And two that we did not like got out. They retired because they had like very little support. We had 53 we picked up in the Senate. They were going to win the Senate, remember? And I will tell you, folks, I worked hard. I did 32 big, fat rallies. And those rallies brought us to a tremendous Senate victory so that we can continue onward with our judges and our approvals. And the fake news back there, they love to say Donald Trump suffered a big defeat. In all due respect for us, the Senate, far more important. We won the Senate and we had this, like, tremendous victory. We get no credit at all. They say, Donald Trump suffered a humiliating defeat. And one of the commentators and I appreciate it one of the shows where they were saying how I suffered a defeat, this commentator said, Excuse me, he did not run. Let us face it. You know, you can only do so much. And what they do not say is governor of Ohio, great guy. He won by seven with one day. He was down by six. One day into the election, I went out, I campaigned, worked hard, made a speech. It was a fantastic crowd like this. And all the people in the other ballrooms that are waiting for us. He was down by six; he won by seven. Then we have Georgia the governor of Georgia. He was losing in the primary by 10. I got a call from David Perdue and Sonny Perdue two great guys. Could you endorse him? And I checked him. And I said, I love this guy. He is down by 10. He won by 40. Can you believe that? I endorsed him, Mark. He won by 40. Then he had a tough race against the new star of the Democrat Party not Democratic. We have to do that. You know, it sounds prettier when we use Democratic. I even like I hate to say in the speech, the Democrat Party because it does not sound good. But that is all the more reason I use it, because it does not . They should change it because it sounds much better.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5489, "text": "But then, he had an election against their star who followed me after the State of the Union Address. And they campaigned for her, and they worked so hard. And we kicked their ass. We had a rally at the airport, where 55,000 people showed up to the airport. They had three other hangars that were full. The problem was they gave the press, like these guys they gave the press too good a location because the people behind them could not see properly. I said, You are going to win the election. He won the election. He won it fairly easily, against their star. And now David Perdue is going to win for senator in 2020. And then and then we had Florida, and many others. And we have a candidate, Ron DeSantis a friend. He was running against, in the primary, somebody that was easily going to win. He was scheduled to be the next governor of Florida. But Ron has been great to me on the witch hunt. He is been a defender of me against these phony charges of Russia. My wife said, You never spoke to anybody from Russia, darling. But Ron DeSantis I like people that defend me. You know, when people defend me, I defend them. That is why I like Mark. That is why I like Mark Levin. And I am not sure a lot of people like him. He is tough as hell. But I like him. I love him. But then we have Florida. So, Ron DeSantis is at three. He calls up, Sir, can I have your endorsement? I said, Ron, you are at three. Your opponent is, I guess, agriculture commissioner has 22 million in the bank. He is up in the 20s or 30s. I said, Ron, do not make me do this, Ron. Because I know if he loses which almost never happens when I endorse somebody. Only one time, and that was because it was done in the middle of the day of the election. Nobody knew I did it. They got home, they said, I did not know Trump endorsed him. But I said, Ron, do not do it. I said, All right, I will do it. He went from 3 to 60. And then he ran against a guy who had unbelievable support. He had every celebrity go into Florida. He had money all over the place. And Ron was in there pitching, and I was in there pitching with him.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5490, "text": "And we now have a great governor in the state of Florida. And I could mention many others other governors, many other states. But I am not going to bore you with it. And I think I really think that it is incredible what we did in the midterms. Remember, You cannot win unless you win the state of Ohio. We got the governor of Ohio, and he is great. We love you, Mike. As we defend American values at home, we are also defending. We have secured all sorts of funding, all sorts of record everything. And we will never forget our military. We will never forget our veterans. We are taking care of our veterans like they have never been taken care of before. We just got them Choice, so now they can go see a doctor. Now they can go and see a doctor instead of waiting on line for weeks and weeks and weeks. And we got them Accountability. You could not fire anybody in the VA. You had sadists. You had people that took advantage of our veterans. They have hit them. You could not fire them. You had thieves that were stealing openly stealing. You could not fire them. Now you look at the guy, you say, Get the hell out of here. Nobody thought we could get it. For 40 years they tried to get it. For 40 years they tried to get it; they could not get it. And VA Choice, they thought for many, many decades they'd been trying to get VA Choice. You could not get it. Now, instead of waiting on line for two days, nine days, three weeks people were dying. People that were not very sick would be dead by the time they saw a doctor, six weeks later. Now these great veterans, if there is a big wait, they go outside, they go to a local doctor. We pay the bills. And we actually save a lot of money, if you can believe it. And I got that approved after 44 years of being unable to get it approved for our veterans. We love our veterans. And just in finishing up, as you know, I just returned from Vietnam, where I had very productive meetings with Chairman Kim Jong Un. We have developed a good relationship very good and made great historic progress. Donald Trump should not, under any circumstances, be doing this or that. You know, they are telling me how to negotiate. One administration gave billions of dollars to him and got nothing. And we have not given him anything yet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5491, "text": "I look forward to maybe doing something at some point. I am going to get other countries to give. Because every once in a while, you have to walk, because the deal was not a deal that was acceptable to me. I do not like these deals that politicians make. They make a deal just for the sake of doing it. I do not want to do that. I want to make a deal that either works, or let us not make it. But the one thing we have, though, is we have no testing, no missiles going up, no rockets going up. We got our great people back. We get our great, great people. And that includes our beautiful, beautiful Otto Otto Warmbier whose parents I have gotten to know, who is incredible. And I am in such a horrible position, because in one way I have to negotiate. In the other way, I love Mr. and Mrs. Warmbier, and I love Otto. And a lot of what I do with respect to North Korea, and any success that we hopefully have and we have had a lot. We are given no credit. They do not remember that, in the last days of the Obama administration, rockets were flying all over the place, nuclear testing was going on. They were being shoved over three, four inches. We are getting the remains back of a lot of our soldiers from many, many years ago. Mike Pence was in Hawaii. It was one of the most beautiful ceremonies. We have made a lot of progress, and we will continue to make progress. And I really think what we are doing there is very important. But we actually had to walk, but I think we had a very good meeting. In fact, when I came home, they put out a statement that, actually, they were willing to do much less on the sanction front. North Korea has an incredible, brilliant economic future, if they make a deal. But they do not have any economic future if they have nuclear weapons. It is really a bad thing for them. I think we learned a lot over the last couple of days. And that is an important thing, especially when we are dealing with this kind of a situation. For years, you watched as your leaders apologized for America. You saw that. Now you have a President who is standing up for America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrump2019conservativepoliticalactionconference", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the 2019 Conservative Political Action Conference", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-2019-conservative-political-action-conference/", "publication_date": "03-03-2019", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5510, "text": "Today I want to talk to you about our Nation's duty to ensure that all America's seniors can enjoy their golden years as healthy as modern medicine will allow. I want to talk about my plan to strengthen and modernize Medicare and the important steps we can take to encourage older Americans to undergo health screenings that can save their lives and improve the quality of their lives. For 34 years now, Medicare has been the cornerstone of our efforts to protect the health of the disabled and our seniors. Last month at the White House, I unveiled a fiscally responsible plan to secure and modernize this vital program for the 21st century. The plan will strengthen Medicare by controlling cost, promoting competition, and dedicating a significant portion of the budget surplus to keeping the Trust Fund solvent until the year 2027. And my plan will modernize Medicare by matching its benefits to the latest advances of modern medicine. Since Medicare's founding in 1965, a medical revolution has transformed health care in America. Once the cure for many illnesses was a scalpel; now, just as likely, it is a pharmaceutical. That is why I made helping seniors afford the prescription drugs essential to modern medical care a key part of the Medicare plan. But even as we modernize Medicare with the prescription drug benefit, we also must modernize Medicare's preventive care benefits. Today, doctors have new tools to detect and prevent diseases earlier and more effectively than ever. And for millions, early detection can mean the difference between a full recovery and a bleak prognosis. For instance, if prostate cancer is caught early, the survival rate is 99 percent; but if it is not , the rate can be a discouraging 31 percent. In 1997 we worked across party lines to expand Medicare coverage for preventive services. But too few seniors still are using this benefit. Last year just one in seven older women received a mammogram covered by Medicare. For many seniors on fixed incomes, who every day must struggle to pay for food, rent, and other necessities, the cost of even a modest copayment can be prohibitive, and that can cost lives. It makes no sense for Medicare to put up roadblocks to screenings and then turn around and pick up the hospital bills its screenings might have avoided. No one should have to undergo a dangerous surgical procedure that could have been prevented by a simple test. No senior should have to hesitate to get the preventive care they need.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress121", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-121", "publication_date": "10-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5511, "text": "I am glad to have the chance of being present at the formal dedication of this new building, which in its management stands in line of succession to a series of buildings, themselves typifying in no small degree the extraordinary development of the public school system of the United States. It was some sixty-four years ago that this institution was first established under a man of great eminence alike in the work of pedagogy and in other fields- Professor Biggs. At the time when it was started the public-school system of the United States had begun and was in the process of its first development. The development of the high school, especially during the last half century, has been literally phenomenal. Nothing like our present system of education was known in earlier times. No such system of popular education for the people by the representatives of the people existed. It is, of course, a mere truism to say that the stability and future welfare of our institutions of government depend upon the grade of citizenship turned out from our public schools. And no body of public servants, no body of individuals associated in private life, are better worth the admiration and respect of all who value citizenship at its true worth, than the body composed of the teachers in the public schools throughout the length and breadth of this Union. They have to deal with citizenship in the raw and turn it out something like a finished product. I think that all of us who also endeavor to deal with that citizenship in the raw in our own homes appreciate the burden and the responsibility. The training given in the public schools must, of course, be not merely a training in intellect, but a training in what counts for infinitely more than intellect-a training in character. And the chief factor in that training must be the personal equation of the teachers; the influence exerted, sometimes consciously and sometimes unconsciously, by the man or woman who stands in so peculiar a relation to the boys and girls under his or her care-a relation closer, more intricate, and more vital in its after-effects than any other relation save that of parent and child. Wherever a burden of that kind is laid, those who carry it necessarily carry a great responsibility. Scant should be our patience with any man or woman doing a bit of work vitally worth doing, who does not approach it in the spirit of sincere love for the work, and of desire to do it well for the work's sake.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicatoryexercisesthenewhighschoolbuildingphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at the Dedicatory Exercises of the New High School Building in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedicatory-exercises-the-new-high-school-building-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-11-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5512, "text": "Doubtless most of you remember the old distinction drawn between the two kinds of work, the work done for the sake of the fee and the work done for the sake of the work itself. The man or woman in public or private life who ever works only for the sake of the reward that comes outside of the work, will in the long run do poor work. The man or woman who does work worth doing is the man or woman who lives, who breathes that work; with whom it is ever present in his or her soul; whose ambition is to do it well and to feel rewarded by the thought of having done it well. That man, that woman, puts the whole country under an obligation. As a body all those connected with the education of our people are entitled to the heartiest praise from all lovers of their country, because as a body they are devoting heart and soul to the welfare of those under them. It is a poor type of school nowadays that has not a good playground attached. It is not so long since, in my own city at least, this was held as revolutionary doctrine, especially in the crowded quarters where playgrounds were most needed. People said they did not need play grounds. They expected to make good citizens of the boys and girls who, when they were not in school, were put upon the streets in the crowded quarters of New York to play at the kind of games alone that they could play at in the streets. We have passed that stage. I think we realize what a good healthy play ground means to children. I think we understand not only the effects for good upon their bodies, but for good upon their minds. We need healthy bodies. Sometimes you can develop character by the direct inculcation of moral precept; a good deal more often you cannot. You develop it less by precept than by your practice. Let it come as an incident of the association with you; as an incident to the general tone of the whole body, the tone which in the aggregate we all create. Is not that the experience of all of you, in dealing with these children in the schools, in dealing with them in the family, in dealing with them in bodies any where? They are quick to take the tone of those to whom they look up, and if they do not look up to you, then you can preach virtue all you wish, but the effect will be small.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicatoryexercisesthenewhighschoolbuildingphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at the Dedicatory Exercises of the New High School Building in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedicatory-exercises-the-new-high-school-building-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-11-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5522, "text": "Thank you, Madam Attorney General, for all the great work you do. our United States Attorney, Alan Bersin; the Immigration and Naturalization Commissioner, Doris Meissner; the person who was very active in helping me pass the crime bill which put these police officers on our streets, former Congresswoman Lynn Schenk, I am delighted to see you here. I want to thank all the officers who are here from the Customs, the Border Patrol, Immigration, from Chula Vista, from San Diego. I especially want to thank these uniformed officers who give their lives to make our lives safer and all the community citizens groups who work with them. Ladies and gentlemen, when I came to California and to San Diego 4 years ago and I listened and attempted to learn what was going on here, I saw an enormous amount of potential and a lot of stress. Mostly what people talked to me about then were two problems, the economy and the problem of crime and illegal immigration. I spent a lot of time here 4 years ago and had the opportunity to come back often since. If you will forgive me just one personal note, this is the first time I have come back to San Diego since the death of my friend Larry Lawrence, who served this country so well as our Ambassador to Switzerland, and I miss him now, coming back here, and I want to thank him for what he did for me here. Anyway, what we tried to do was to develop a serious approach, to work with you, to help you seize control of your destiny, and to help you do more of what you were already inclined to do. On the economy, I'd like to make just a couple of comments. Because we are building two new ships for our national defense, the San Diego shipyards are busy, securing another 4,000 jobs until the year 2000. Because in 1993 and 1994 the Congress agreed to invest in defense conversion, in high technology research and development and new environmental technologies and biotechnology, jobs are being created here that have a real future to grow in number and to strengthen and diversify the economy of this area. Because we have started work on a new sewage treatment plant and we are proposing to step up our sand reclamation efforts, thanks in no small measure to the relentless efforts of Congressman Filner, we are ensuring that the San Diego beaches will be enjoyed by children and their children for generations to come.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunitysandiegocalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Community in San Diego, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-san-diego-california", "publication_date": "10-06-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5523, "text": "But we all know that America has had, building over years and years and years, a serious problem of illegal immigration which has aggravated the crime problem along our borders. The Attorney General talked about some of the progress we have made. She gave me a report today which reviews where we are and what we have done. So as we have worked hard to bring the crime rate down all over America, we have made special efforts in our border communities, because we know that we have special responsibilities there. They have to be enforced, and the consequences of their enforcement or their failure to be enforced have to be borne primarily by the National Government. I have done what I could to get more money into California in very difficult fiscal circumstances in Washington to help you deal with the costs of illegal immigration-more than ever before- and I will continue to work on that. I agreed with what the district attorney said when he said there is a difference in being a safer community and a safe community. I agreed with what the sheriff said when he said that we'd never fully solve this problem until both the United States and our friends in Mexico are working together in a long-term and consistent way. But think about how far we have come in the last 3 1/2 years. Three and a half years ago, many people believed that these problems were totally intractable, that drugs would always flow freely, that illegal immigration would always be rampant, that criminal immigrants deported for crimes they committed here in America would return the very next day to commit crimes again. For a lot of years people in public life at election time talked tough about immigration, but did not do much about it. We tried to change that. We tried to substitute deeds for words. It is a pretty good practice in a lot of areas of life, and I think it is worked pretty well here. We will work with you to give you the tools you need to patrol your streets, protect your children, secure our common border. And you have to do what you can to help the police to bring the crime rate down and make your community safe. San Diego has the 5th lowest crime rate in the country of the 75 biggest urban areas. I actually believe when the numbers come out this year, you will be even lower than that. And it is a great tribute to the work that you have done together.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunitysandiegocalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Community in San Diego, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-san-diego-california", "publication_date": "10-06-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5524, "text": "Let me say, again, while the job is far from over-and we have a lot of work to do-the report I got from the Justice Department makes clear that we have begun to turn border communities under siege into communities where law and order and safety and security are once again the order of the day. I want to say too, again, I am glad that we are working to put 100,000 police officers on the streets of America, that we are putting community policing in every community in the country that is willing to receive it. But what really makes it work are law enforcement officers committed to it and citizens groups working on it. Today I had a very impressive briefing from people involved in the San Diego citizens patrol in the Safe Streets Now program. So I ask you, do not stop now. We need more citizens working with more police officers until crime is the exception, not the rule. When you are surprised when you hear about a crime, then you will know you have got a safe community. And you need to continue to do it. The second thing we are doing is to put criminals behind bars. And after they serve their time, if they do not belong here in the first place, they are being deported. The crime bill gave us the weapons we need to do things that had not been done before to deal with the problems of criminal activities by illegal immigrants. As of January of last year, we have arrested more than 1,700 criminal aliens and prosecuted them on Federal felony charges because they returned to America after having been deported in the first place. We are changing the policy of this country on that problem. We are also making strides in getting control of our border. We have added Border Patrol agents, in San Diego alone increasing by 762 the number of agents who are working for you by the end of this year. In El Paso, our border guards stand so close together, they can actually all see each other. Here in San Diego, control has been taken back of Imperial Beach from the criminals and the illegals. We deployed underground sensors, infrared night scopes, encrypted radios. We built miles of new fences, installed thousands of watts of new lighting. I heard what was said earlier about the threats facing San Diego residents in East County, particularly with the onset of the fire season. Today I have asked the Secretary of Agriculture, Dan Glickman, to send 20 more law enforcement officers to Cleveland National Forest, and they will be there by the close of business today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunitysandiegocalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Community in San Diego, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-san-diego-california", "publication_date": "10-06-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5525, "text": "Let me say one final word of appreciation here to the cooperation between the Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials. What they have done here today, over the last several months-I mean, it ought to be something that we all take for granted. It ought to be the rule in every jurisdiction in America. And I tell you, that is what we are trying to create for all the citizens of the United States, wherever they live. And I am very proud of what they have done. They have put aside politics and put the people of this community first, their safety first, their future first. That is why there has been an 84 percent increase in felony drug prosecutions in one year. That is why murders and robberies and car thefts have dropped so much, because they are all working together and working for you, instead of protecting their turf and playing politics. And I say, God bless them, we need more like them all over this country. Let me just say one other thing that affects Americans a long way from you, but I bet you have all identified with them in the past few months. Even as we crack down on illegal immigration and do more than has ever been done before on that, we must never forget that we are all a nation of immigrants and, except for the Native Americans, we all came from somewhere else. Our incredible diversity is a source of our rich potential as we move into this global society. Anybody who is willing to work hard, obey the law, respect their neighbors, and follow the values inherent in the Constitution ought to have a chance in America, and that ought to be the rule here. And because we are people and because we are imperfect, the country will always have problems. But we really fall into a dangerous trap when we start blaming our problems on other people just because they are different from us. I say that because even though I am a long way from there, my heart has been in my native South for the last several weeks as we have dealt with this incredible rash of church burnings. That is just another way of people finding a way-trying to blame somebody else or put down somebody else or put distance between them and someone else in a totally dehumanizing way, forgetting that everybody should be treated equally before the law, in the eyes of our fellow Americans, just as we are before God Almighty. Just 2 days ago, I reported to the American people about what we were doing to deal with the church bombings.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunitysandiegocalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Community in San Diego, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-san-diego-california", "publication_date": "10-06-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5526, "text": "I greatly appreciate it. I love beautiful rooms, and this is one of them. I want to thank you, President. I am honored to be here in a city where, as it is been said many times before, the impossible has become the possible. And thanks to the 11 leaders in this room, I think that the expression will become the story of this incredible initiative. I want to congratulate you on the great job you have done. This region has special significance to me because, as you know, my wife, is from Slovenia. We spoke about it. And she loves Slovenia. Every one of your nations has an inspiring story. You have overcame years of oppression, and you all are united by the hope that your citizens will flourish, your commerce will prosper, and your countries will absolutely thrive. That is what is going to happen, because I know the people. This is the spirit of hope that brings us all together. We are here at this historic gathering to launch a new future for open, fair, and affordable energy markets that bring greater security and prosperity to all of our citizens. We are sitting on massive energy, and we are now exporters of energy. So one of you need energy, just give us a call. On behalf of the American people, let me say that we stand with the Three Seas nations. We support your drive for greater prosperity and security. We applaud your initiative to expand infrastructure. We welcome this historic opportunity to deepen our economic partnership with your region. It is been 28 years since your brave citizens lifted the Iron Curtain and defeated communism, yet much of the infrastructure within Central and Eastern Europe has remained a relic of the old Soviet era. Your people have been held back by the old roads, railways, and pipelines that still operate on restrictive systems. The Three Seas Initiative will transform and rebuild the entire region and ensure that your infrastructure, like your commitment to freedom and rule of law, binds you to all of Europe and, indeed, to the West. The United States also strongly supports the creation of the Three Seas Business Forum so that your countries can build cutting-edge projects with the best talent in the energy industry, and do so under budget and ahead of schedule. under budget and ahead of schedule. New energy infrastructure is essential to this rebuilding effort. We hope that the Three Seas nations will advance the same goals we are working on to achieve for our people in America. Our stock market just hit an alltime high.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthethreeseasinitiativesummitwarsawpoland", "title": "Remarks at the Three Seas Initiative Summit in Warsaw, Poland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-three-seas-initiative-summit-warsaw-poland", "publication_date": "06-07-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5527, "text": "We have, I think, 16 years the in 16 years, it is the lowest unemployment rate. We are rebuilding it, adding billions and billions of dollars of new equipment, the best equipment in the world. We make the best equipment in the world by far. We are adding many billions of dollars of brandnew equipment. We have taken off restrictions, and people are really moving hard. So when I say that the stock market is at an alltime high, we have picked up in market value almost $4 trillion since November 8, which was the election. Four trillion dollars, it is a lot of money. Personally, I picked up nothing, but that is all right. Greater access to energy markets, fewer barriers to energy trade and development and strengthening energy security is what we are looking to do. The Three Seas Initiative has the potential to accomplish all of these essential objectives and very quickly because you have incredible people, and they will get it done quickly. I congratulate your nations for already beginning the critical projects that open us up to greater access, and you will be totally open and have access to energy markets and remove barriers to energy trade, such as floating LNG terminal on the Croatian island of Krk. Did you ever hear of that? You know all about that. I will bet you know all about it. These projects and many others are crucial to ensuring that your nations continue to diversify your energy sources, suppliers, and routes. I also applaud Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, and Austria for pursuing a pipeline from the Black Sea. We just approved a big pipeline also, the Keystone Pipeline. It was under consideration for many, many years, and it was dead, and I approved it in my first day of office. And it is now under construction. The United States is proud to see that our abundant energy resources are already helping the Three Seas nations achieve much-needed energy diversification. In fact, I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the Government and people of Poland for receiving their first shipment of U.S. liquefied natural gas last month. And you made a very good deal, I understand. The United States will never use energy to coerce your nations, and we cannot allow others to do so. You do not want to have a monopoly or a monopolistic situation. The United States is firmly committed to open, fair, and competitive markets for global energy trade.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthethreeseasinitiativesummitwarsawpoland", "title": "Remarks at the Three Seas Initiative Summit in Warsaw, Poland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-three-seas-initiative-summit-warsaw-poland", "publication_date": "06-07-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5528, "text": "America will be a faithful and dependable partner in the export and sale of our high-quality and low-cost energy resources and technology. We make the best technology, and we make the best, best technology for fighter jets and ships and equipment, military weapons. All over the world, they talk about the greatness of our military equipment. So when you buy and as you buy military equipment, hopefully, you will be thinking only of the United States. With the expanded trade and new infrastructure, we will unleash incredible energy innovation that is safe, responsible, and environmentally friendly. The United States supports a commonsense approach to protecting natural resources, one that responsibly balances economic growth, job creation, and energy security. We invite all countries to work with us to achieve this objective and to develop innovative technologies that empower nations around the world to be faithful stewards of their natural resources, while lifting millions out of poverty and into great and beautiful futures. The Three Seas Initiative will not only empower your people to prosper, but it will ensure that your nations remain sovereign, secure, and free from foreign coercion. When your nations are strong, all the free nations of Europe are stronger, and the West becomes stronger as well. Together, our Nation and yours can bring greater peace, prosperity, and safety to all of our people. This summit ushers in the next great energy frontier. This is largely about energy, because we are that great exporter. We have just become what is going on in our country is incredible, and I hope you take advantage of it by using these resources. I am thrilled to join you today, and I want everyone to know that the United States supports your bold efforts. These projects will improve countless lives across the region and throughout the world. America will be your strongest ally and steadfast partner in this truly historic initiative. And we stand ready, willing, and able to help with your energy needs and other needs as they come along.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthethreeseasinitiativesummitwarsawpoland", "title": "Remarks at the Three Seas Initiative Summit in Warsaw, Poland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-three-seas-initiative-summit-warsaw-poland", "publication_date": "06-07-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5529, "text": "I come before you tonight to report on the State of the Union for the third time. I come here to thank you and to add my tribute, once more, to the Nation's gratitude for this, the 89th Congress. This Congress has already reserved for itself an honored chapter in the history of America. Our Nation tonight is engaged in a brutal and bitter conflict in Vietnam. Later on I want to discuss that struggle in some detail with you. It just must be the center of our concerns. But we will not permit those who fire upon us in Vietnam to win a victory over the desires and the intentions of all the American people. This Nation is mighty enough, its society is healthy enough, its people are strong enough, to pursue our goals in the rest of the world while still building a Great Society here at home. And that is what I have come here to ask of you tonight. I recommend that you provide the resources to carry forward, with full vigor, the great health and education programs that you enacted into law last year. I recommend that we prosecute with vigor and determination our war on poverty. I recommend that you give a new and daring direction to our foreign aid program, designed to make a maximum attack on hunger and disease and ignorance in those countries that are determined to help themselves, and to help those nations that are trying to control population growth. I recommend that you make it possible to expand trade between the United States and Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. I recommend to you a program to rebuild completely, on a scale never before attempted, entire central and slum areas of several of our cities in America. I recommend that you attack the wasteful and degrading poisoning of our rivers, and, as the cornerstone of this effort, clean completely entire large river basins. I recommend that you meet the growing menace of crime in the streets by building up law enforcement and by revitalizing the entire Federal system from prevention to probation. I recommend that you take additional steps to insure equal justice to all of our people by effectively enforcing nondiscrimination in Federal and State jury selection, by making it a serious Federal crime to obstruct public and private efforts to secure civil rights, and by outlawing discrimination in the sale and rental of housing. I recommend that you help me modernize and streamline the Federal Government by creating a new Cabinet level Department of Transportation and reorganizing several existing agencies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagethecongressthestatetheunion27", "title": "Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the Union.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-the-congress-the-state-the-union-27", "publication_date": "12-01-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5530, "text": "In turn, I will restructure our civil service in the top grades so that men and women can easily be assigned to jobs where they are most needed, and ability will be both required as well as rewarded. I will ask you to make it possible for Members of the House of Representatives to work more effectively in the service of the Nation through a constitutional amendment extending the term of a Congressman to 4 years, concurrent with that of the ENTITY. Because of Vietnam we cannot do all that we should, or all that we would like to do. We will ruthlessly attack waste and inefficiency. We will make sure that every dollar is spent with the thrift and with the commonsense which recognizes how hard the taxpayer worked in order to earn it. We will continue to meet the needs of our people by continuing to develop the Great Society. Last year alone the wealth that we produced increased $47 billion, and it will soar again this year to a total over $720 billion. Because our economic policies have produced rising revenues, if you approve every program that I recommend tonight, our total budget deficit will be one of the lowest in many years. Total spending in the administrative budget will be $112.8 billion. On a cash basis which is the way that you and I keep our family budget the Federal budget next year will actually show a surplus. That is to say, if we include all the money that your Government will take in and all the money that your Government will spend, your Government next year will collect one-half billion dollars more than it will spend in the year 1967. I have not come here tonight to ask for pleasant luxuries or for idle pleasures. I have come here to recommend that you, the representatives of the richest Nation on earth, you, the elected servants of a people who live in abundance unmatched on this globe, you bring the most urgent decencies of life to all of your fellow Americans. Who will they sacrifice? Are they going to sacrifice the children who seek the learning, or the sick who need medical care, or the families who dwell in squalor now brightened by the hope of home? Will they sacrifice opportunity for the distressed, the beauty of our land, the hope of our poor? Time may require further sacrifices. And if it does, then we will make them. But we will not heed those who wring it from the hopes of the unfortunate here in a land of plenty. I believe that we can continue the Great Society while we fight in Vietnam.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagethecongressthestatetheunion27", "title": "Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the Union.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-the-congress-the-state-the-union-27", "publication_date": "12-01-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2919, "text": "The major obstacle to peace is the settlement activities. Would you request from Prime Minister Olmert a freeze on the settlements? I think the major obstacle to peace is going to be the politics of both Palestinians and Israelis trying to take advantage of the difficult work that these two leaders are going to have to do to define a state; that is what I think. I think that extremists, in some instances, will try to stop the peace. I believe there is a lot of forces at play in Israel that will try to stop these two men from defining what a state will look like. And my job is to help them stay on the big picture and have the confidence necessary to make tough decisions. But there is a mechanism to deal with that, and that is the roadmap commission, for the best word-is the trilateral commission, which we head, to deal with these roadmap issues. Now, we can solve those-we can work through those problems, but the key is to define a state. And the reason I believe it is because these two men, with whom I have spent a fair amount of time, are committed. The state will come into being subject to a roadmap. But the first step is to define what is possible; here is what a state will look like. And that is very important for both the Palestinians and the Israelis. Well, the key is for me to convince the two leaders to work through the hard issues. I will help them, but in order for there to be lasting peace, they have got to come to the table; they have got to negotiate it. And what ends up happening in this process is that the leaders will commit, and then they will get their committees to work, and it gets stuck. And that is when I will have to work with Condi Rice to unstick it, just to keep it moving. One thing is, is that they know that they have got a good partner in peace in me. They also know that I am not going to be in office a year from now, so there is a certain urgency to get this state defined. And my trip is going to be to just kind of keep momentum. One, it was a chance for the Palestinians and the Israelis to know that the United States is serious about helping them, and equally importantly, it gave the world a chance to come to the table. The rest of the Middle East was there, and that is an important movement.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2920, "text": "It is going to be important for both Israel and the Palestinians to know that an agreement they reach will be supported by the Middle East. And so part of my-one of the goals of my trip is to remind our friends and allies in the Middle East that they have got to be supportive of the Middle East peace process as well. And I am going to want to know- and I am going to tell them, yes, I am, but we expect you to be constructive players too. Exactly, but, I mean, can you elaborate a little bit about this? I mean, what more can you do? But you see, to get it to this place-I mean, a visit is important, but I am on the phone a lot, and Condi is on the phone a lot. And there is a reason why the timing of this visit is what it is. I mean, there was an intifada when I first came into office. I mean, I supported it as the first American President ever to support it. The Israelis, under Ariel Sharon, came to the conclusion that this is in their interests. We are pushing a lot, let me put it to you that way. I repeat to you, though, that the notion that somehow America can impose its will on two parties, I do not think it works. And so you just got to-I hope that as a result of this interview and my trip, the people come away with the notion that George Bush understands now is the time to move. I mean, people know that you are close friend of Israel. What would you want to do to win hearts and minds of the Palestinians, to assure them that the United States is a fair broker in the peace process? You know, I have heard that. I have heard that, Well, George Bush is so pro-Israeli he does not -he cannot possibly care about the plight of the Palestinian person. I would hope that my record, one of liberation and-liberation, by the way, not only from dictatorship, but from the disease around the world, like ENTITY/ENTITY or malaria-is one that will say to people, he cares about the human condition, that he cares about each individual, that my religion teaches me to love your neighbor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2921, "text": "I have spoken clearly about my belief that-I believe-I pray to the same God as a Muslim prays-that the freedom agenda is really aimed at liberating people, and that the hope is, is that there will be an active, real Palestinian state so people can realize their dreams. But they are going to have to be-they are going to have to do some work. They are going to have to have security forces that protect the average person. They are going to have to have institutions that bring confidence for the Palestinians. They have to have the ability to attract investment. The Palestinians are great entrepreneurs, and if just given a chance, I am confident the business community will flourish. And most importantly, though, they are going to have to reject the extremists who murder innocent people. And by the way, we are engaged in a great ideological struggle. I mean, in retrospect, would you regret not being involved earlier in the peace process, 7 years ago? I think that you would find that I have been very much involved in the peace process when you look at the facts. And the reason we have been able to have this successful conference in Annapolis is because people's attitudes lined up in-kind of in the same direction. So this is the right time, you say? --for the couple of years of my administration. It took a while to convince people that the two-state solution was in the security interests of both parties. One was the intifada, which made it awfully hard to discuss peace at that time. It just-it created the conditions that made it more difficult to get people's minds in the right place to begin the process. And so now I think we have got the stars lined up, and I think we got a shot, and I am going for it. I know he is telling me-- Part of the visit, as well, is Iran and the Gulf States. What exactly do you want from the Gulf States regarding Iran? And would you ask for their cooperation in case of a military strike? First of all, I will assure the Gulf States that I believe we can solve this problem diplomatically. Secondly, will-they are going to want more from me than I am going to want from them. They are going to want to know what this NIE was all about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2922, "text": "And I am going to remind them that at my press conference when I explained the NIE, I clearly said, Iran was, is, and will be a danger if they are allowed to enrich, because they can take the knowledge on how to enrich and convert it to a covert program. If they have had one-a program once, they can easily start a program. And so I view the Iranian regime as a danger. I also believe that the Iranian people are not bad-they are good people-and that they can have a better way forward. Well, what are you going to do about it? It is one thing to define the problem, do you have a strategy? And if you say you can solve it diplomatically, what is your strategy? And I will explain the strategy of economic isolation, that-you know, it is sad; we really do not need to have to be in this position. If the Iranian Government would suspend their enrichment programs, like the international community has demanded, there is a better way forward for them. But they say that they need this program. And my answer is, is that if you need it, then why have not you been transparent and disclosed it and honest about it? And what were you doing with a military-secret military program in the first place? And so I view Iran as a danger; I truly do. And I do not view the people as a danger, I view the Government as a danger. But will it be harder for you to try to convince the Gulf States what-the American position after the intelligence report? The fact that I am having to explain it means it is harder after the report. But I believe I will be able to convince them. What they want to know is whether or not I think they are a danger. They want to know whether I think it is a danger and are we committed to helping people achieve security. And part of the trip is to tell people, yes, we have got-we are engaged to help you, if you want our help to enhance security. Now, look, nobody wants to be dictated to, and I am certainly not going to do that. I am there to reassure and to look people in the eye and say, I believe Iran is a threat, we have a strategy to deal with it, and we want to work with you. Did you ever discuss a military option with the Gulf States? Will I ever do that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2923, "text": "No, I have not , because I believe we can solve this diplomatically. On the other hand, as you have heard me say many times since you cover the White House, that all options must be on the table in order to make sure diplomacy is effective. Secretary Gates told Al Arabiya in an interview recently that the diplomatic option is still 100 percent in focus. Does that mean that you are going to still pressure Iran on the diplomatic front? We will continue to pressure them on the diplomatic front. And it is hard, because sometimes people are more interested in market share for their goods than they are for achieving peace. And so I have spent a lot of time with allies in Europe, for example, convincing them of the importance of working together to send a common message to the Iranian regime. So yes, the diplomatic option is on the table, and it is active, and we are working hard. On the Syria issue-I do not know if I am allowed to ask one-- All you got to do is ask; I will handle it. On the Syria issue, I mean, we already talked about-you actually told me that you-patience with Asad is running out. But we still have no Lebanese election. What does it mean? What can you do? Is it sanction against Syria? What can you do? Well, what we can do is make sure that the world understands our position and try to convince them that we ought to work together to say to the Syrians, let Sleiman go forward. That is the President that the people want there in Beirut, and he ought to go forward. And that is going to be on my agenda when I talk to friends and allies in the Middle East, that-and we can collectively send the message to President Asad. We have sanctioned Syria, and I am looking at different ways to keep sending a tough message because, so far, he has shown no willingness to be constructive on Lebanon or in dealing with a militant Hamas or in stopping suiciders from heading into Iraq- in other words, some reasonable things that we would like to see done in order to improve relations which he has not done. We are working very carefully-closely with the French, for example. I have had a conversation with President Sarkozy on the subject. I will be talking to my friend King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia on the subject, who has got a very keen interest in seeing to it that the Lebanese democracy goes forward.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2924, "text": "And so we have got a very good chance to have a more focused, concerted, universal message that President Asad, I hope, will listen to. But some will say they might wait for another year until you leave office, and then-- Well, he could try that. But in the meantime, there will be others around who he will have irritated as a result of his stubbornness. And so yes, I mean, he could try to wait me out, but there is other leaders in the world that are as equally concerned as I am about Syria not letting the Presidency go forward and really hurting this very important democracy in the Middle East. Lebanon's survival as a democracy is, in my judgment, very important for the world. And Syria is-has been-when we passed the resolution out of the United Nations, it worked. And yet as opposed to honoring the notion of staying out of the-and to stop obstructing politics- Syria has just not been helpful at all. So will you impose sanction on Syria? We have already, and we are looking at different options, of course. Well, we are always looking for ways to make sure that we are effective. To show that you actually supporting Prime Minister Siniora, why not visiting Lebanon on this trip? You have to just-I have got only so much time. We have had plenty of high-ranking officials go to support Prime Minister Siniora. I think about Condi, and I think about Admiral Fallon, who I sent over there to help analyze what the Lebanese forces need. Listen, I was very impressed when Prime Minister Siniora made the decision to move Lebanese forces into the extremist stronghold and dealt with them. That is what you are supposed to do. And in order to have a safe and secure society, the state has got to show that it can provide security for the people and not tolerate pockets of extreme radicals who are murderous in their intentions, and he did. And right after that, I sent Admiral Fallon in to say, look, we need to help strengthen this man. He showed courage and leadership, and he needs to have a military that is able to function at the behest of a state to provide security. And so we are in the process of inventorying and analyzing and seeing how we can help from that perspective. But do you hope the election will go forward in Lebanon?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2925, "text": "They keep delaying it, and I am convinced a lot of it has to do with the fact that Syria is not helpful. If you want to be isolated, if you want to be-or if you want-you have a choice: Do you want to be isolated, or a part of the world? You can make the choice. You can hang out with a limited number of friends, like Iran, or you can have better relations in the neighborhood and in the world. Step one is to get out of the way of these Presidential elections. They have got a good candidate. A lot of people agree that this is the person, and now Syria needs to get out of the way. Sir, on the Iraq issue, the security has improved. Does that mean you are going to withdraw troops by the end of the year? Our troops decisions will be made based upon the considered recommendations of our commanders. And success in Iraq is essential, and therefore, I will make the decisions along with those recommendations based upon success. There is still a lot of work to be done, however, and I am-you know what thrills me the most is that the average Iraqi's life is becoming more hopeful. Here is what I tell people. the chance for that child to grow up in peace and to realize dreams; a chance for the child to go outside and play and not fear harm. There is still too many suiciders, but the level of violence is declining. I did not see this, but I was told that the celebrations at New Year's Eve in Baghdad were festive. And life is coming back, and it is -that is exciting to me. And just to follow up on that, the generals were saying that Iran and Syria actually has been playing a role in stopping the suiciders of coming to Iraq. Would you credit them for that at least? I am not willing to credit the Iranians yet. I do not have enough evidence. One general said that, then he corrected his story. I think so long as we are finding sophisticated IEDs-that could only have been manufactured in Iran, that are killing innocent people inside Iraq-that is cause for concern. I am willing to have dialogues with the Iranians about Iraq in Iraq, but our message will be, if we catch you providing arms and trained-training people, then we will -we are going to hold them to account. You just got to understand that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyatelevision0", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Nadia Bilbassy Charters of Al Arabiya Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-television-0", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2938, "text": "Let me dive right in and talk about this issue of tax inversion, this issue of American companies going overseas to reduce their U.S. tax bill or get rid of it. I take it you are not calling it illegal. What I am saying is that companies thrive in the United States in part because they benefit from the best university system in the world, the best infrastructure -- although I'd like to see us do a little better on infrastructure. You know, there are a whole range of benefits that have helped to build companies, create value, create profits. For you to continue to benefit from that entire architecture that helps you thrive, but move your technical address simply to avoid paying taxes, is neither fair nor is it something that is going to be good for the country over the long term. And this is basically taking advantage of tax provisions that are technically legal , but I think most people would say if you are doing business here, if you are basically still an American company, but you are simply changing your mailing address in order to avoid paying taxes, then you are really not doing right by the country and by the American people. Some people would respond that, you know what, these guys are hired to maximize profit. And they are doing basically what they were hired to do. And in fact, it is plenty American for them to try to make as much profit as they can, hire as many people as they can as a result. Well, keep in mind that what we are trying to do is to say that if you simply acquire a small company in Ireland or some other country to take advantage of the low tax rate, you start saying we are now magically an Irish company, despite the fact that you may only have a hundred employees there And you have got 10,000 employees in the United States. You are just gaming the system. You continue to benefit in all kinds a ways from being an American company. It is true that, you know, there are a lot of things that may be legal that probably are not the right thing to do by the country. People are paid to maximize profits. They are also paid to make sure that they are thinking about, in addition to shareholder value, how do you grow a company over the long term? And this kind of strategy, I think, undermines people's confidence in how companies are thinking about their responsibilities to the country as a whole. ENTITY, this is your sixth year in office here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveliesmancnbcsfastmoney", "title": "Interview with Steve Liesman of CNBC's Fast Money", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-liesman-cnbcs-fast-money", "publication_date": "24-07-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2939, "text": "Democrats seem to support corporate tax reform and Republicans seem to support it. Your critics suggest that you have not put the presidential muscle behind this issue, certainly the way you did health care or the way you did stimulus early on in your presidency. Well, we reached out repeatedly to both Democrats and Republicans. If we lower corporate tax rates and close loopholes, there is going to be more certainty in terms of what corporations pay. They will benefit from a lower but more certain tax rate. It also allows us then to close some of the loopholes that permit companies to artificially shift profits overseas so they are avoiding tax compliance. It would allow us potentially to have companies who have profits overseas to start bringing some of those profits back and reinvesting in the United States. So there is a whole bunch of good reasons why we should do it. I will be honest with you ENTITY. And they have trouble getting stuff done right now even when they say they want to do something. And I have said to the speaker, I have said to Majority Leader Reid, that we are prepared and we have put forward very specific proposals in terms of how we can get this done. Invariably, it takes some time to work through a big tax reform piece of legislation. When Ronald Reagan last did it back in '86, '87, it was about a year-and-a-half-long process. And I think that the people should expect that this administration will be foursquare behind it as long as the goal of tax reform is to simplify the system, make it fair, as opposed to simply slashing corporate rates while maintaining a bunch of loopholes that are not productive and are not creating jobs and value here in America. Well, let us move from talking about the guys in the C suites to average Americans here. What will you tell average American viewer about the outlook for the economy? Your former economic advisor, Larry Summers says we may be in for a period here in America of lower growth for a protracted period of time. Do you believe in that forecast? And are you concerned that that means we are not going to be able to meet the entitlement promises that we have made without cutting those entitlements and/or raising taxes? You know, I am always bullish about America over the long term. And if you think about where we were, ENTITY, when I came into office and where we are now, it is pretty hard to find an economic measure where we are not significantly better off.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveliesmancnbcsfastmoney", "title": "Interview with Steve Liesman of CNBC's Fast Money", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-liesman-cnbcs-fast-money", "publication_date": "24-07-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2940, "text": "I do not have to tell you about the stock market and where that is gone; corporate profits, record highs; but also unemployment now lower than it was pre-Lehman. We remain the most dynamic, innovative economy in the world. We have this huge comparative advantage when it comes to energy. We are now producing more oil than we import, first time in a couple of decades, even as we are massively increasing clean energy. And when it comes to deficits, we have cut them by more than half. And when it comes to health care, we are slowing the growth of health care inflation to the lowest levels in 50 years. So there are a lot of things there that I will - that give me confidence we are poised to take off. But there are some things that are holding us back. The main thing that is holding us back is inaction by our federal government on things like infrastructure, on raising the minimum wage, on doing some things that would help middle-class families feel a little bit of relief. If we do those things, then we are going to be in pretty good shape. It is true, coming out of a financial crisis - historically, when you look at worldwide trends, it is hard when you have a big financial crisis that precipitates a recession. The good news is, because of the resilience of the American people, but also in part because of some good policies and quick action on our part, we have recovered faster and stronger than most counterparts around the world. I can confirm most of your data as the economics reporter for CNBC. And I think you have heard me on the stump talk about this is the source of anxiety for the American people. Now these are 20-, 30-year trends that we have been seeing, a larger and larger portion of increased productivity and increased profits accruing to the very top of the economic pyramid, and the vast majority of middle class folks and folks who are trying to work in the middle class, not seeing higher incomes, higher wages. There are policies we can put in place that can help that. Some of it has to do with globalization. Some of it has to do with technology. Some of it has to do with what some have called a shift to a more winner-take-all economy, because capital's mobile and workers are not and they have less leverage. But we know that if we raise the minimum wage, that is 28 million people who get helped.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveliesmancnbcsfastmoney", "title": "Interview with Steve Liesman of CNBC's Fast Money", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-liesman-cnbcs-fast-money", "publication_date": "24-07-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2941, "text": "We know that if we invest in the $2 trillion of deferred maintenance that we have on infrastructure, that you have got a whole bunch of guys and gals in hard hats who can start going to work. That gives them additional income. That in turn means more customers for businesses. Historically, when the middle class is doing well and people are rising in the middle class, lo and behold, business does well also. You talked about the stock market earlier. It is now at near-record levels almost every day. Are you concerned there is a bubble out there like we had in '01 and '08? Well, you know, I try to avoid commenting on the day-to-day trends in the stock market. I think what is true is that the Federal Reserve has properly focused on the need for us to bring unemployment down. The cost of unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, as well as unemployment for young people just getting started in their careers, that is something that has devastating effects on the economy for generations, or for decades to come. So I think Janet Yellen has said this is a focus of ours right now. What that does mean is when you have got low interest rates that there is a lot of money looking for returns. And that is probably boosted the stock market significantly. My estimation is that, you know, you have got a lot of savvy investors out there. You have got people who recognize that what goes up can come down as well. I will leave it up to them to make determinations about whether valuations and stock prices are too high. I am more concerned about the day-to-day fundamentals. And if we get those fundamentals right, then I am pretty confident that we can do very well in the next decade. You have said a bunch of times that getting the wealthy to pay a little bit more. And you have succeeded in raising that top tax rate to 39 percent, or rolling back the tax cuts. Is there a limit to how much you believe the government should take from an individual in terms of a top tax rate? You know, I do not have a particular number in mind, but if you look at our history, we are still well below what, you know, the marginal tax rates were under Dwight Eisenhower or, you know, all the way up even through Ronald Reagan. Tax rates are still lower on average for most folks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveliesmancnbcsfastmoney", "title": "Interview with Steve Liesman of CNBC's Fast Money", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-liesman-cnbcs-fast-money", "publication_date": "24-07-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2942, "text": "And what that means is that we probably can make some more headway in closing loopholes that folks take advantage of, as opposed to necessarily raising marginal rates. I have talked about this before. You know, I have got friends of mine who are hedge-fund managers, and they do not always like to hear it, but some, I think, will readily acknowledge if you are making a billion dollars a year and you are paying 15 percent on that billion dollars when your secretary's paying 20 percent, 23 percent, you know, that is not fair. And if we close some of those loopholes, not just carried interest but a range that we know are not economically productive, then sure, some folks do not get to take advantage of stuff they should've been taking advantage of anyway. But that also means we can finance government, keep our deficits under control, and invest in the things that we need to grow over the long term. There is no doubt that the economies of Russia and Europe have intertwined, primarily around the energy sector. And it makes some Europeans more concerned about a robust response to the violations of sovereignty and territorial integrity that Russia's been conducting when it comes to Ukraine. The good news is that, despite some of those commercial concerns, we have seen Europe move with us - not always as fast as we'd like, but they get there. And sadly, tragically, the shooting down of this Malaysian Airlines airliner and the recognition that it is likely it was shot down and it is also likely that it was conducted by non-state actors that were provided incredibly powerful weapons by the Russian government - all that, I think, may stiffen the spine of my European partners moving forward. I want to ask you about Israel. What do you make of these - the FAA banning these flights and then lifting it? Do you think it is safe for Americans to fly to Israel? You know, we have not made decisions when it comes to airline safety based on not just politics, but even our strong alliance with Israel. We have to just look at the facts. The initial ban that was imposed by the FAA was based on Israel needing to show us that, in fact, it was safe for commercial airlines to fly in. They worked through a checklist of concerns and mitigation measures that needed to be taken. Having completed those, and convinced the FAA, we moved forward.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveliesmancnbcsfastmoney", "title": "Interview with Steve Liesman of CNBC's Fast Money", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-liesman-cnbcs-fast-money", "publication_date": "24-07-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2943, "text": "We are here at the White House today for a very unique event, an exclusive interview with ENTITY, in which the questions come from American people who have submitted me and chosen them online. My name is ENTITY, and I am ENTITY of news and politics at YouTube. We had a chance to do this before I was elected and had a great time, so I am glad we can do it again. Well, let us tell people a little bit about how this works. Five days ago, as you were delivering your State of the Union address, we opened up our Moderator platform on YouTube, where thousands of people have been submitting and voting on both video and text questions. Some of them, as you will see, were hard-hitting. But all of the questions you will see here today were voted into the top tier of the thousands of questions we received. And none of them have been chosen by the White House or seen by ENTITY. This should be a lot of fun. ENTITY, let us let Lehman Marcus in Silver Spring, Maryland, kick us off. He submitted this video to remind us of where things were a year ago. Marcus writes, ENTITY, I know there have been political setbacks to getting health-care reform done, but the 40 million people who have no insurance cannot wait. Will they be able to get insurance this year? We now have a bill that is come out from the House, come out from the Senate. And if you look at the core components of that legislation, what you have is 30 million people who get coverage, insurance reform so that people who have health insurance are going to be able to be protected from not being able to get it because of preexisting conditions, or suddenly losing their health care because, you know, the insurance company has some fine print that they did not read. It makes sure that we actually start bending the cost curve, controlling the rising premiums by instituting better practices in terms of how we reimburse doctors and how we ask hospitals to work together. We have already invested in electronic IT, electronic medical records, things that can help make the system more efficient. So we have this enormous opportunity. But the way the rules work in the United States Senate, you have got to have 60 votes for everything. After the special election in Massachusetts, we now only have 59.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2944, "text": "We are calling on our Republican colleagues to get behind a serious health-reform bill, one that actually provides not only the insurance reforms for people who do have health insurance, but also the coverage for folks who do not . My hope is -- is that they accept that invitation and that they work with us together over the next several weeks to get it done. Yeah. And the number-one question we got in health care came from Mr. Anderson in Texas, who asked, why are the health-care meetings and procedures not on C- SPAN, as promised? And then one of the top questions in the government reform category was Warren Hunter in Brooklyn, who said, how do you expect people in this country to trust you when you have repeatedly broken promises that were made on the campaign trail, most recently the promise to have a transparent health-care debate? Well, I -- I guess -- first of all, I would say that we have been certified by independent groups as the most transparent White House in history. We are the first White House since the founding of the republic to list every visitor that comes into the White House online so that you can look it up. People know more about the inner workings of this White House, the meetings we have. We have excluded lobbyists from boards and commissions. But we also report on any lobbyist who meets with anybody who is part of our -- part of our administration. So we have actually followed through on a lot of the commitments that we have made. And so Warren's mistaken in terms of how he characterized it. What is fair to say is that as the health-care process went forward, not every single aspect of it was on C-SPAN. Now, keep in mind, most of the action was in Congress. So every committee hearing that was taking place, both in the House and the Senate, those were all widely televised. The only ones that were not were meetings that I had with some of the legislative leadership, trying to get a sense from them in terms of what it was that they were trying to do. I have acknowledged that. And that is why as we move forward, making sure that in this last leg, these last five yards before we get to the goal line, that everybody understands exactly what is going on in the health care bill -- that there are no surprises, no secrets -- that is going to be an imperative. It is going to be one of my highest priorities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2945, "text": "You know, the central focus of your State of the Union was obviously jobs. And a lot of people wrote in asking for some clarity around some of your plans for small businesses. I want to play you two video questions in a row. One year ago today, my wife and I were both let go from our jobs in corporate American within 48 hours of each other. We have since started a small business. And we employ a couple of people around us. What is being done to free up funding and encourage the growth of all the small businesses that have such a tremendous impact on our economy? how exactly are you planning on helping small businesses grow and prosper, besides simply providing tax breaks? Well, let me start with some specific issues that confront every small business all across the country. And it is absolutely true that if we can get small businesses back on their feet, then that is going to go a long way towards bringing the unemployment rate down, because that is the fastest generator of jobs across the country. Number one, small businesses really are still struggling with financing. You hear stories everywhere you go that even profitable, successful businesses are having trouble getting financing, because banks frankly just do not want to take the risk. After having taken way too many risk before, now they are taking no risk. And small businesses are punished for that. So we have expanded the SBA loan, the Small Business Administration loan, portfolio by about 70 percent. We have been waiving guarantees and fees, trying to streamline the process, just to get more capital into the hands of small businesses. It is important to see if we can give more incentives to small business. So, for example, we are just eliminating capital gains for small businesses, which is particularly important if you have got a start-up. Ten years from now, you may end up being successful with your small business, but suddenly you have got to pay taxes on it. If you can take that money and, instead of paying Uncle Sam, reinvest it in your business, you can grow it further. So we think that that is the kind of strategy that makes a lot of sense. We want to also make sure that we are providing tax credits for hiring of small businesses -- small businesses that are hiring new employees. And so we have got a whole range of proposals there. Now, in addition to the tax credits, in addition to the financing, one of the other things that, frankly, small businesses need is just a economic environment that is growing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2946, "text": "And one of the things we are very proud of is the fact that we had a 6-percent contraction of the economy at the beginning of last year; this past quarter we had a 6-percent increase in the growth of the economy. That 12-percent swing offers greater opportunities for small businesses to prosper and thrive. One of the biggest burdens on small businesses is health-care costs. And probably nobody benefits more from our health-care proposals than small businesses, because what we are doing is we are saying that not only will you get tax credits to buy health insurance, but we are also going to let you pool, buy in to a big exchange so that you have the same purchasing power as a big company like -- Ford or, you know, Google is able to negotiate with insurance companies and get a good deal. Well, now small businesses, by pooling together in this exchange, are going to have that same leverage. That will help lower their costs. And for a lot of small businesses, it is not just a matter of giving health insurance to your employees; it is also just being able to buy health insurance for yourself. That will cut down on small businesses' costs and they will be able to, again, invest more in their business. You know, a lot of Americans saw what happened on Wall Street this past year, and they wrote in saying, you know, When are we going to get OUR bailout? Here is ENTITY from Florida, who submitted the number-one video question in the financial reform category. ENTITY, my name is ENTITY , from South Florida. I have a question about your -- program and why the banks are reluctant to modify loans of homeowners who can afford to stay in their homes. Now that taxpayers bailed them out, they refuse to help us out. And I would like to know what say you, ENTITY. Well, look, this is something that we have been dealing with since the beginning of this financial crisis. We set up a program for loan modification that so far about 4 million people have taken advantage of across the country. You have got about 800,000 people who have gotten loan modifications that are saving them an average of $550. The problem is -- is the number of people whose mortgages are underwater, here they actually have a home value that is now less than their mortgage, is a lot bigger than that. And you know, you saw declining values all across the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2947, "text": "So the amount of money that we have been able to get into this program has not met the entire need. We are now pushing the banks as hard as we can to make sure that not only do they do the most with the resources that we have been giving them, but that they also do a much better job of customer service with people who are coming to them. I get letters all the time of people who've gone through all kinds of hoops, filled out forms; the bank does not call them back, or after they have gone through a trial period, the bank says, Well, you know, we now think we should not give you a home modification. What we are trying to do is to increase transparency and force all the banks to tell us exactly what are you doing with your customers who want to stay in their homes, can afford to pay a mortgage but need something a little bit more limited. And I am -- I am hopeful that we are going to continue to see more and more people take advantage of it. Given the magnitude of the housing problem out there, that there are still going to be pockets of areas where the housing values have dropped so much that it is still going to be tough for a lot of people, and we are just going to have to work our way through this as the economy improves. ENTITY, let us lighten things up for a minute. We got a lot of people just submitting their ideas to you -- ideas for how to make the country better. They want to hear what you thought about them. Let us play sort of a faster round of a thing we will call Good Idea, Bad Idea. I will show you an idea. You say whether you think it is good or bad, and maybe just a few sentences about why you think that. First one comes from Aloha Tony in your home state of Hawaii. He says, ENTITY, our deficit is higher than ever, at $12 trillion. Will you consider allowing the private sector to buy and take over the most troubled government-run agencies, such as the U.S. Postal Service? There are examples where privatization makes sense, where people can do things much more efficiently. But oftentimes what you see is, companies want to buy those parts of a government-run operation that are profitable, and they do not want to do anything else.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2948, "text": "Everybody would love to have that high-end part of the business that FedEx and UPS are already in; business-to-business you make a lot of money. But do they want to deliver that postcard to a remote area somewhere in rural America that is a money-loser? Well, the U.S. Post Office provides universal service. Those companies would not want to provide universal service. My car-insurance company will allow me to take driver's ed classes to reduce my monthly premiums. Can we do the same thing for health insurance -- take classes in cooking, nutrition, stress management, communication, parenting, stopping smoking, maybe even exercise classes, and get a reduction on our monthly premiums? Well, I -- I think that the idea is a good one, and that is that if people are being healthy, that they should be able to get some incentives for that. And a lot of companies are starting to do that. We probably do not want the insurance companies, though, making those decisions, because insurance companies have every incentive to take the youngest, healthiest people and insure them, since they are less likely to have to pay out, and then leave older, sicker individuals out of their insurance pools. So it is important in any health-care program to make sure that the young and the healthy and the older and -- and the sicker are in a single pool. But what we should encourage are individual companies who provide incentives for wellness programs, smoking-cessation programs -- you know, that they are going to get a workout once in a while. Those things are something that we should encourage. And, you know, the first lady, Michelle ENTITY, she is really focusing right now on childhood wellness, healthy eating, getting exercise. That is a campaign that she is going to be pushing all year long. Let us get one more idea in here. This next one comes from Jay Leavers in Dover, Delaware, who writes, do you think it'd be worth looking at placing solar panels in all federal, state and school buildings as a way to cut energy costs and put that budget money to better use? And we want to do everything we can to encourage clean energy, and I have instructed the Department of Energy to make sure that our federal operations are employing the best possible clean-energy technology, alternative-energy technology.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2949, "text": "And what we are seeing is more and more companies realize this is a win-win for them; not only is what they are doing environmentally sound, but it also, over the long term, saves money for them. Well, let us move back to the questions. And I have got to tell you, the number-one question that came in, in the jobs and economy category, had to do with the Internet. And it came from James -- Indianapolis. He said, an open Internet is a powerful engine for economic growth and new jobs. Letting large companies block and filter online content and services would stifle needed growth. What is your commitment to keeping Internet open and neutral in America? Well, I am a big believer in net neutrality. I campaigned on this. I continue to be a strong supporter of it. My FCC chairman, Julius Genachowski, has indicated that he shares the view that we have got to keep the Internet open, that we do not want to create a bunch of gateways that prevent somebody who does not have a lot of money but has a good idea from being able to start their next YouTube or their next Google on the Internet. We are getting pushback, obviously, from some of the bigger carriers who would like to be able to charge more fees and extract more money from wealthier customers, but we think that runs counter to the whole spirit of openness that has made the Internet such a powerful engine for not only economic growth, but also for the generation of ideas and creativity. Well, you know, to get good jobs, I think many Americans realize they need a higher education. Here is a video question from Saginaw, Michigan. Dear ENTITY, as ENTITY who has 14 credits and three part-time jobs, just was wondering, what are your plans for -- plans to lower college tuition costs? You know, I know we are in a struggling economy right now, but any little bit that you can help would be appreciated. Well, ENTITY is right that, you know, college tuition costs are just crushing on a lot of folks. And this is something I remember from my own experience, because Michelle and I, we had college loans we kept on paying off for a decade after we had graduated from law school. We have already done a huge amount to increase Pell grants, to help increase the accessibility of college loans and grants at the college level, but we want to do more.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2950, "text": "And so we have put forward an initiative that is being debated in Congress and we hope to get passed this year, where if you have student loans, that you will not have to pay more than 10 percent of your income on those loans; that after 20 years, they will be forgiven; and if you have gone into public service, they will be forgiven after 10 years. That would provide a huge amount of relief for people. We still need to expand more the Pell grant program, make it both accessible to more people and raise the amount of tuition. In order to pay for this -- the best part of this is we can actually figure out how to pay for it, because right now you have got a lot of banks and financial-service companies who are still middlemen in the federally guaranteed loan programs. And if we can cut those middlemen out, then you have got several billion dollars that you can invest in the programs that I just described. This is something that I have made a top priority. I want us to once again have the highest college-graduation rates of any country in the world by 2020. Colleges and universities also, though, have to figure out how can they cut their costs. Because even if we are putting more and more loans in -- more and more money for loans, if the inflation in higher education keeps on skyrocketing, over time it is still going to gobble up all that extra money, and we will be right back where we started. So we have got to show more restraint at the college and university level in terms of ever- escalating costs. Well, let us back up a bit just from the specifics of education policy, and ask a more fundamental question, which comes from ENTITY in Ohio. As a math teacher, I want to know what you think it means to be an educated person. We know that if you have got a college education, you are going to make multiples of what you would make as a high school graduate, much less a high school dropout, over the course of lifetime. But its absolutely true that a high-quality education is not just a matter of being a good worker, it is also a matter of being a good citizen, it is also a matter of being able to think critically, evaluate the world around you, make sure that you can process all the information that is coming at us in a way that helps you make decisions about your own life, but also helps you participate in the life of the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2951, "text": "And, you know, I am a big believer that the most important thing that a kid can learn in school is how to learn and how to think. If, you know, Malia and Sasha, my two daughters, are asking questions, know how to poke holes in an argument, know how to make an argument themselves, know how to evaluate a complicated bunch of data, then I figure that they are going to be okay regardless of the career path that they are in. And I think that that requires more than just rote learning, although, you know, it certainly requires good habits and discipline in school. It also requires that in the classroom, they are getting the kind of creative teaching that is so important. And that is why our administration's initiated something called Race to the Top, where my secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, has helped to design a competition among states so that they can foster the kinds of excellence in learning everywhere, not just in some schools, not just in some states, but in every school in every state. If states want money, we are going to reward excellence. And if -- and we will show them, you know, what has been proven to work in terms of encouraging the kind of critical thinking that all of our children need. ENTITY, the number-two category after jobs and the economy that people submitted to you was national security and foreign policy. And the number-one question came from a concerned conservative in Georgia, who asked about your plans for the war on terror. And then Sean from Pennsylvania followed it up with, Dear ENTITY, if we remove our troops from the war on terror, how will you continue to combat the threat of terrorism? al Qaeda and its extremist allies that have metastasized around the globe; that would attack us, attack our allies, attack bases and embassies around the world and most -- most sadly attack innocent people regardless of their backgrounds, regardless of their religions. You know, al Qaeda is probably the biggest killer of innocent Muslims of any entity out there. Now, they employ terrorist tactics. And we have to fight them on all fronts. We have to fight them in very concrete ways in Afghanistan and along the border regions of Pakistan, where they are still holed up. They have spread to places like Yemen and Somalia. And we are working internationally with partners, to try limit their scope of operations and dismantle them in those regions. But we also have to battle them with ideas.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2952, "text": "We have to help work with the overwhelming majority of Muslims, who reject senseless violence of this sort, and to work to provide different pathways and different alternatives for people expressing whatever policy differences that they may have. And I think we have not done as good of a job on that front. We have to project economically, working in countries like a Yemen that is extraordinarily poor, to make sure that young people there have opportunity. The same is true in a place like Pakistan. So we want to use all of our national power to deal with the problem of these extremist organizations. But part of that does involve applications of military power. And that is why although it is the hardest decision that a commander in chief can make, to send our troops into battle, I thought it was very important to make sure that we had an additional 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, to help train Afghan forces, so that they can start providing more effective security for their own country, in dealing with the Taliban, and ultimately allow us to remove our troops but still have a secure partner there that is not going to be able to use that region as a platform to attack the United States. Well, another central issue in the war on terror now is Guantanamo. And a lot of users wrote in about this. I think that question's actually about Sudan, which you did not actually address in your State of the Union, but it was actually the number-one-voted question, and it is a video from the Enough Project here in D.C. ENTITY, more than 3 million Darfuris fear returning home because of instability. Many fear that Sudan may be on the brink of war. What will you do to galvanize the international community to ensure that widespread violence does not occur in Sudan this year? Well, the situation -- Sudan has been heartbreaking, but also extremely difficult, and something that we started working on the day that I came into office. Our first task was, at that time, making sure that people who were in refugee camps in Darfur had access to basic water, food, other necessities of life. And this was after the Sudanese government in Khartoum had kicked out a whole bunch of nongovernmental organizations that were providing assistance there. We were able to get that assistance back in to help at least initially stabilize the situation. The next step in the challenge is to broker a lasting peace agreement between rebels who are still in the Darfur region and this -- this government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2953, "text": "And I have got a special envoy who has been very active in trying to bring together the international community to get that deal brokered. Part of what makes it complicated is, you also have a conflict historically between northern Sudan and southern Sudan. They finally reached a agreement after a lot of work, but the Sudanese now -- the southern Sudanese now have an option where they may be seeking to secede from all of Sudan. That is another potential conflict that could create additional millions of refugees. And so what we are doing is trying to work with not only the regional powers, but the United Nations and other countries that have shown a great interest in this to see if we can broker a series of agreements that would stabilize the country, and then allow the refugees who are in Darfur to start moving back to their historic lands. Sadly, because of the genocide that took place earlier, a lot of those villages are now destroyed. And so thinking about how to resettle these populations in places that are viable economically, that have the resources to support populations, is a long-term development challenge that the international community is going to have to support. We continue to put pressure on the Sudanese government. If they are not cooperative in these efforts, then it is going to be appropriate for us to conclude that engagement does not work. And you know, we are going to have to apply additional pressure on Sudan in order to -- in order to achieve our objectives. But my hope is, is that we can broker agreements with all the parties involved to deal with what has been an enormous human tragedy in that region. Another question we missed from the deck, but it was about Guantanamo. And essentially, a user's saying, why is it taking so long to close down Guantanamo? Number one, you have got a whole bunch of individuals in Guantanamo, some of whom are very dangerous, some of whom were low- level fighters, some of whom the courts have determined should never have been put there in the first place. We have had to evaluate each of those cases -- hundreds of cases -- one by one to determine what these various categories are, and do it in a way that stands up to our standards of due process and legal scrutiny. Then we have got to figure out, if we are closing Guantanamo, where are we going to put them?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2954, "text": "And we have proposed that -- there are a number of options on the continental United States where you could hold these people as trials, either in military commissions or in Article III courts, are pending. But unfortunately, there has been a lot of political resistance, and you know, frankly, some of it just politically motivated; some of it people being legitimately scared about, Well, if we have got somebody who we have been told is a terrorist in our backyard, will that make us a target? One of the things that we have had to try to communicate to the country at large is that historically we have tried a lot of terrorists in our courts. We have them in our federal prisons. But it is been one of those things that is been subject to a lot of, in some cases, you know, pretty rank politics. And you know, we have got to work through that process because Congress ultimately controls the purse strings in creating new facilities. If Congress makes a decision that they are going to try to block the opening of a new facility, it potentially constrains what our administration can do. And so this is something that we have got to work through both in Congress but also with public opinion, so that people understand that ultimately this is the right thing to do; by closing Guantanamo, we can regain the moral high ground in the battle against these terrorist organizations. There is been no bigger propaganda weapon for many of these extremists than pointing to Guantanamo and saying that we do not live up to our own ideals. And that is something that I strongly believe we have to resist, even if it has some costs to it and even if it is not always the most politically popular thing to do. ENTITY, we do not have much time left, but I want to make sure we get to the issue of energy, the environment. One of the rare moments where you were able to get applause from your friends on the Republican side of the aisle in Congress the other night was when you mentioned nuclear energy. And just today your budget announced tripling the loan guarantees for nuclear reactors. A lot of people had questions about just how this will work and why you did that. ENTITY, record numbers of young people elected you, in support of a clean-energy future. If money is tight, why do you propose wasting billions in expensive nuclear, dirty coal and offshore drilling? We need to ramp up efficiency, wind and solar that are all economically sustainable and create clean and safe jobs for our generation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2955, "text": "Well, you are not going to get any argument from me about the need to create clean-energy jobs. I think this is going to be the driver of our economy over the long term. And that is why we put in record amounts of money for solar and wind and biodiesel and all the other alternative, clean-energy sources that are out there. In the meantime, though, unfortunately, no matter how fast we ramp up those energy sources, we are still going to have enormous energy needs that will be unmet by alternative energy. And the question then is, where -- where will that come from? Nuclear energy has the advantage of not emitting greenhouse gases. For those who are concerned about climate change, we have to recognize that countries like Japan and France and others have been much more aggressive in their nuclear industry, and much more successful in having that a larger part of their portfolio, without incident, without accidents. We are mindful of the concerns about storage of spent fuel and concerns about security. But we still think it is the right thing to do, if we are serious about dealing with climate change. With respect to clean-coal technology, it is not possible at this point to completely eliminate coal from the menu of our energy options. And if we are ever going to deal with climate change in a serious way, where we know China and India are going to be greatly reliant on coal, we have got to start developing clean-coal technologies that can sequester the harmful emissions; because otherwise, countries like China and India are not going to stop using coal, we will still have those same problems, but we will not have the technology to make sure that it does not harm the environment over the long term. So I know that there is some skepticism about whether there is such a thing as clean-coal technology. What is true is right now, that we do not have all the technology to prevent greenhouse gas emissions from a coal -- coal-powered -- power plants. But the technology is close, and it makes sense for us to make that investment now, not only because it'll be good for America, but it will also ultimately be good internationally. We can license and export that technology in ways that help other countries use a better form of energy that is going to be helpful to the climate-change issue. ENTITY, I think we are out of time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevegroveyoutube0", "title": "Interview With Steve Grove on YouTube", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-grove-youtube-0", "publication_date": "01-02-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2962, "text": "You have just announced a new $447 billion dollar Jobs' Bill. And we all know that African-American unemployment is running really high, above 16%, nearly double that of whites. How does this bill specifically target them? Well, first of all, I think it is important to remember that we are going through the worst financial crisis and subsequent economy that we have seen since the Great Depression and so the challenges for everybody out there is tough. You are right; it is especially tough for the African-American community. The steps we took in the first two and a half years made a difference. It made sure that a lot of folks were still on the job that otherwise would not be. It made sure that states were able to stabilize their budgets, so they were not laying off as many teachers or fire fighters or civil servants that are providing services every day. But, you know, what we realized over the last couple of months is that because of a whole range of issues, including what is happened overseas in Europe, that the economy needs another boost, and we have got to focus more on putting people back to work now. So the Jobs' Bill, overall, is designed to make sure that we are rebuilding schools and bridges and putting construction workers back to work. It makes sure that we are putting teachers back in the classroom. It makes certain that we are providing incentives to hire veterans who have been out of work, but also the long-term unemployed who are out of work. And it makes sure that we are providing tax breaks and tax credits to just about every family and every middle class person and every small business around the country. Now, with respect to the African-American community, they benefit from all of that, but in addition, we are making sure that summer jobs for youth are included in the package. Making sure that we reform our unemployment insurance so that, in addition to 1.4 million African-Americans getting unemployment insurance, we are also providing them a pathway so that they start getting some on-the-jobs training. All those things are going to have a huge impact in the African-American community. Why not say then, This is for you. This is for African-Americans? If there was a banking crisis, then you'd target money for the banks. If there was a national disaster, you'd target your money for the National Disaster Relief. America works when all of us are pulling together and everybody is focused on making sure that every single person has opportunity.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithemmettmillerblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Emmett Miller of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-emmett-miller-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "26-09-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2963, "text": "And so when we put forward a program like, for example, the Health Care Bill, our focus is people who do not have health care. Now it turns out that the majority of folks who do not have health care are also working families, and are disproportionately African-American and Latino, but that does not mean that it is only for them. There are a whole bunch of folks all across the country who need help. And we are going to help every single person who needs help. Were their expectations way back when in 2009 too high? I think that people understood that it took us a long time to get into this mess; it is going to take a long time to get out of this mess. And I look folks in the eye all the time who do not have a job or who have lost their home or who are struggling otherwise. And what they tell me is, as long as I feel like you are fighting for me, as long as I feel like you have my interests at heart, then we are going to stand behind you. The test is not going to be whether we solve this problem overnight. The test is are we projecting a vision for the future. That is going to be one that makes sure that every kid in this country has a shot and that the middle class is still growing and the African-American middle class is growing. Because look, the fact of the matter is that it is a test for America how well those at the bottom do, not just how well those at the top do. And what is always made this country great is the belief that everybody's got a chance regardless of race, regardless of creed. And that is a vision that I think the vast majority of Americans still share. It is been tested over the last three years, but my job is to keep on pushing in that direction. And it is true; you have said you are the ENTITY for all people, not just for one group. But once again, if you have a disaster in a certain area of the country, you are going to target money there. If I am a 16-year-old kid on the south side of Chicago, okay? My mom's working 10 hours a day for peanuts. All I see around me is blight. I am going to help you, a young African-American? Emmett, first of all, that is not what people are saying.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithemmettmillerblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Emmett Miller of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-emmett-miller-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "26-09-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2964, "text": "What people are saying all across the country is we are hurting and we have been hurting for a long time. And the question is how can we make sure that the economy is working for every single person? And the truth of the matter is, the vast majority of African-Americans understand that. Now, there is certain communities that have been struggling even when the economy does well, which is why, for example, the Neighborhood Stabilization Program is going to be targeting communities that are having the toughest time. But the other thing I want to make sure that you do not just kind of slip in there with this notion that African-American leaders of late have been critical. There have been a handful of African-American leaders who have been critical. They were critical when I was running for ENTITY. There is always going to be somebody who is critical of the ENTITY. That is my job, in part, is particularly when the economy is going as badly as it is right now, people are going to have concerns. What I think you are seeing all across the board in every community is that when unemployment is high and people are having a tough time, then they have to feel as if there is some hope, there is some prospects out there. And right now, the economy has been bad for a long time. It was bad before I got elected, and it has continued to be very tough for a lot of folks. Until people actually feel better about the economy, they are going to continue to have problems and they are going to continue to hope that the White House can do more. What would you say to the man who stood on the podium back in 2009 that he did not know then what he knows now? Well look, there are a lot of things we know now that we did not know then. I mean, the day I took the oath of office we did not know that the economy had just contracted nine percent in the previous quarter. We did not know that 400,000 people had lost their jobs the month before and another 600,000 were going to lose their jobs the month after. So, I think the depth of the economic crisis worldwide was something that was glimmering on the horizon, but I do not think we fully appreciated it. Making sure that a U.S. auto industry still existed and we did not lose a million jobs.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithemmettmillerblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Emmett Miller of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-emmett-miller-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "26-09-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2965, "text": "The Recovery Act, which saved a whole lot of jobs in America, even though the folks who did not lose their jobs may not have known that they might otherwise have lost their jobs. So, you know, what I would tell myself if I traveled back in time? I would say it is going to be a long hard slog and the American people are going to, you know, feel kind of worn down after this much difficulty. But I'd also tell that less gray person to hang in there because the American people are resilient and they have good values and they care about the right stuff, and we will get through this. What would you have now done differently? You talked about the rings you did right with respect to jobs, you talked about the programs you were able to put through, you talked about some of the objectives you had. What would you have now done differently in retrospect? I think if we had had better information, it would have been important for me to able to communicate to the American people the fact that this was going to be a long process. That we were not going to fix this in six months. This was a once-in-a-generation recession. And I think that might have helped brace people for the difficulties that were to come. The other thing that, as I reflect on it, is that in the first year or so we spent a lot of time just doing the right thing and not worrying about selling what we were doing. And I think that the more you are in this office, the more you have to say to yourself that telling a story to the American people is just as important as the actual policies that you are implementing. And they have got to have a sense of where it is that we are going to go, particularly during hard times. I sat down with you five years ago in the hallway of a junior college when you were still Senator. It was The Audacity of Hope book tour. Do you ever think back on those times? What reflections do you have, considering who you are now? You know, Michelle tells me at least that I am the same man now that I was when she met me when I was still in law school. I have a pretty clear idea about what is right and what America is all about. And it involves a belief that everybody gets a chance, that there is a sense that we are in this together.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithemmettmillerblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Emmett Miller of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-emmett-miller-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "26-09-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2966, "text": "You know, we are a country that values individual initiative and everybody's got to work hard and everybody's got to be pulling their weight, but we look out for one another. And my politics really is based on those values, and those values have not changed. And the longer I am in this office, the more I believe that when Americans are working together, there is nothing we cannot accomplish. I have seen it time and time again. And part of my job is to help usher America through a very difficult time but still maintain that sense that we are in this together. One of the questions we had was, When? Well look, you know, right now we are in a situation where the economy is stabilized, but it is stabilized with too high unemployment rate. And I think if we get this Jobs Bill passed, that is going to make a difference right away. Some of the things though that have been plaguing the African-American community for too long, those things are going to take years to change. Young people, it was just reported one group for example, is more insured than it is ever been because of the American, or Affordable Care Act. But, how we think about our health habits, all the things the First Lady's doing in terms of what we are eating, in terms of getting exercise, instilling good health habits in our kids- those are things that will take place over the years to reduce the diabetes rate, in the African-American community, for example. How do you get it through Congress? Well, we will get some of it through Congress. And we will just keep pounding away until we get all of it through Congress. And if we do not get all of it through Congress, and we have not seen enough done to help the American people, then we will get a new Congress. Because the bottom line is, that the vision that we put forward in the Jobs' Bill and the ways, by the way, that we intend to pay for it, by making sure that millionaires and billionaires are paying their fair share, that they are not paying lower tax rates effectively than folks who are making 50,000 dollars a year, that combination of efforts to rebuild America, put people back to work, get teachers back in the classroom and paying for it in a responsible way, that vision is one that the American people believe in. I mean, you were citing polls earlier.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithemmettmillerblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Emmett Miller of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-emmett-miller-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "26-09-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2968, "text": "We are very pleased to have this opportunity for this first radio interview with you. What will be item number one on the table when you sit down with Soviet leader Gorbachev in Malta? To be sure that we are not operating in a way that there will be unnecessary misunderstanding. I do not want that to happen. I want to be on the same wavelength as much as we can. So, I would say the meeting is designed to see that the two ships do not pass in the night for lack of light. But what specifically will you bring up first? Well, as I say, we have not ever set an agenda. Clearly, I will be interested in getting his views on the dynamic changes taking place in Eastern Europe. We will have detailed conversations about his economy, and I will be glad to talk to him about ours. And so, I think along those two areas you will see a lot of discussion. problems in this hemisphere, support for Nicaragua, for example; Afghanistan; other areas where Soviet interest and the United States do not parallel each other. You sent him a message in reply to his earlier cable, again saying that you support the reforms going on in his country and in Eastern Europe. Do you support them to the extent that you'd put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, and grant the Soviets some sort of economic assistance to spur those reforms? Well, I am perfectly prepared to discuss economic reforms and what the Soviets would like to see in terms of interest from the West. But I noted with great interest Mr. Shevardnadze's view when asked a similar question. We are not looking for aid. We are not wanting somebody to bail us out. They are a sovereign state, have a high degree of pride but clearly, there will be a discussion of economic matters as they affect the Soviet Union. When you say, as you did in a speech this week, that the Malta summit the Malta meeting, as you all here prefer to call it will not be used to negotiate the future of Europe, what does that mean? Are you taking something off the table there? What I am saying is we are not going to have a Yalta. To the extent that it is not the role of the United States of America and the Soviet Union to divide up things or alter borders or do some of the things that took place at the meeting I have just referred to. We are not going to get into that. It is a broad, general meeting we would not do it anyway.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermaermutualnbcradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Maer of Mutual/NBC Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-maer-mutualnbc-radio", "publication_date": "17-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2969, "text": "Have you, indeed, approved a covert plan that allows the CIA to recruit people to overthrow Manuel Noriega in Panama? Of course I'd love to see Noriega out there, but you know I never discuss intelligence. I was head of the intelligence community for 1 year, a little over a year about a year and one thing that I know you do not do is discuss covert action or rumors about covert action, or confirm or deny covert action. And I wish other people would conduct themselves in that same manner, and then maybe some of the efforts of an intelligence community could be more effective. So, I will not confirm or deny anything of that nature. Now, if you'd like me to state would we like to see Noriega out of office absolutely. I know you want him out of office. How far will you go to get him out? Well, let me ask you this. Since you will not answer that and you will not talk about the specific plan, do you still feel that your hands are tied? do you still feel your hands are tied by Congress on matters like this? No, not on this matter specifically, and if there were to be a plan and I think we have a pretty good understanding with the Intelligence Committee at this point, in the Senate and in the House. Is reunification of the two Germanys is that inevitable? I gave my view on that, and I said that that was a matter for the people of the Germanys to determine. And it is a highly sensitive matter as far as the Soviet Union is concerned, and it is better to leave it right there. But when you look at the way events are going there, is it inevitable in your opinion? And I would say it is a matter for the determination of the German people. Well, many people look at the history books, and they worry about that prospect. Well, we have had discussions with countries that express concerns in this regard because of certain historical precedents, but I do not think that history need repeat itself if there evolves a single German State. But that is down the road, and it is not something that is being pressed. That is a matter for the determination of the German people. Some Members of Congress look at this situation in Europe, and they see it as ripe for debate on considering cutting the defense budget, taking a big chunk out of it. Does that make sense to you? No, it does not make sense to me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermaermutualnbcradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Maer of Mutual/NBC Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-maer-mutualnbc-radio", "publication_date": "17-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2970, "text": "A lot of people think We already have made proposals. We have a bold proposal, a leadership proposal by the United States that has wide support amongst our allies, to do exactly that. Will that be on the table in Malta? Well, it is on the table now. If Gorbachev comes in, and he says why do not we agree to it here? a lot of experts think that he will come in and say that. He is already agreed to it in principle. The Soviet Union has there is no great debate on the principles of the reductions that we have proposed. But the problem is we are hammering out a lot of detail now that cannot be done at a Malta meeting or that has to be done in a multilateral forum. And so, I have been very pleased that the Soviets have been quite supportive of this United States-NATO initiative. Would you be willing to use the Malta meeting as a setting to sign off on such an agreement once I do not want to elevate the expectations of a watching world. That is not going to take place at Malta because the details have not been worked out in the multilateral forum where they are being discussed in Vienna. My hope is that it can meet the timetables I set and the alliance set. Will you sign this DC appropriations bill that includes allowing the use of local funds for abortions for poor women? I have made very clear that I they can test me all they want; they can package it any way they want, but if it expands the use of federally appropriated funds for abortion, I am not going to sign it. And I have been very honest and direct with the District. But if it is appropriated federally, why, I have great difficulty with that, and have been very open with the Congress on it. This is still a very painful subject for you, is not it? It is, I do not like it. I know that our party is big enough to have people in it who differ on this question. If that were not true, I guess I would not have been elected ENTITY, because this issue was widely presented to the American people and very openly debated in debates with Mr. Dukakis, who felt quite differently about it.  Because I was elected to perform on certain things.  I was elected to do certain things. And I want somebody in housing that can support the general initiative on housing. I want people on health that share my respect for human life.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermaermutualnbcradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Maer of Mutual/NBC Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-maer-mutualnbc-radio", "publication_date": "17-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2975, "text": "When you were last here, you were at the midst of the floods of '93. You saw Iowa's flooded farm fields. And this year, by contrast, farmers have record crops. But that in turn, as you know, has depressed prices, and the farm recovery is in jeopardy. Well, when I get to Iowa tomorrow, I want to discuss that in greater detail. I have tried to be a good President for the farmers of this country. And our Agriculture Department, our Agriculture Secretary has done a very good job not only in the flood but afterward. I am sure you know that there was an announcement today that the Agriculture Department will give export enhancements to seven states of the former Soviet Union to try to increase the export of livestock, particularly the pork exports to those countries. And we supported ethanol production; we still do. And we are doing a number of other things that I believe will really help the farm economy in Iowa. And I will have some more to say about it tomorrow when I get there. Well, I hate to push my luck with that in mind, ENTITY, but I would like to ask you about the export enhancement program, the EEP. Now, I know Iowa Secretary Dale Cochran has expressed his interest in getting some changes there, at least, that will combat some of the glut in the pork market. Would you like to give us a hint on perhaps what you think you could do to help Iowa pork producers in overseas trade? Well, we are looking at that, as well. And again, I will have more to say about all that when I get there tomorrow. Let me give you one more opportunity? Have you named, or have you decided in your own mind, at least, a new Ag Secretary? And is Ruth Harkin still on your short list? No, I have not made a decision. And she would be good in any position, I think, in the Government, including that one. She is really done more with the Overseas Private Investment Corporation than anybody has in a long time. And I think any American businessperson that is worked with us in trade and expansion would tell you that the Export-Import Bank, Ruth Harkin's agency, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and the Commerce Department under Secretary Brown, along with the Agriculture Department, have done more for American business than any administration has in a long time. Is Ruth Harkin still interested in the post? Has she given you any indication that she'd like it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnbachmanandlauriegroveswhotelevisiondesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With John Bachman and Laurie Groves of WHO Television, Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-bachman-and-laurie-groves-who-television-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2976, "text": "No, I have gone out of my way not to talk to anybody about this right now because I am not ready to deal with it. Secretary Espy will be there until the end of the year. He has done a superb job for the farmers of this country, and I think virtually every agricultural commissioner in every State in the country agrees with that. President Clinton, unemployment is the lowest now it is been nationwide in years, you know this, and the economy is strong. And yet your approval rating is under 50 percent here in Iowa. Now, with that in mind, how do you think that your visit tomorrow will influence Iowa's undecided voters? Well, what we have to do is get the record out there. the family and medical leave law; the Brady bill; the crime bill; immunizations for all the kids in the country under 2; middle class college loans; apprenticeships for people who are not going to college; an expansion of Head Start. But the people do not know it because this has been a contentious 2 years. The Republicans have been more partisan than any party has against a President of the opposing party since World War II. And I have taken on a lot of tough issues, a lot of special interest groups. I have tried to change the direction of this country. And when you do that, you have to be willing to make enemies and you have to be willing to see your approval ratings go down in the short run as people are, at least, confused by all the conflict which is engendered. Plus, everybody knows that the nature of the way Americans get their information today is more contentious, more divisive, more adversarial than ever before. So I have been given an opportunity now in the last week or 10 days of this campaign to get out and talk to the American people and make my case. The people of Iowa are fairminded people. And I was there when you needed me and so was everybody in my administration, in a hurry, in the flood. And we stayed, and we have seen this through. I have been a good President for the farmers of this country and good for the Iowa economy and good for the ordinary working people of this country. And when the record comes out, the people will make the right decision. Plus, the Republicans are offering us an unbelievable journey into the past that got us in so much trouble. I mean, they want to go back to trickle-down economics.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnbachmanandlauriegroveswhotelevisiondesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With John Bachman and Laurie Groves of WHO Television, Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-bachman-and-laurie-groves-who-television-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2977, "text": "We have already had a big, major press conference I am sorry you all missed it about 20 minutes from here. Are we going to war? There are already accusations and some reports out there that a lot of this turning up the heat now is politically motivated to coincide with the election. ENTITY, I do not think there are already many reports to that end. And I do not think even the most cynical would ever suggest that a President would play politics with the lives of American kids halfway around the world. So, I am sad if you have seen reports like that. I have not , and I think it is the ultimate of cynicism and indecency. one, a major crisis halfway around the world where we have strong support Democrats and Republicans, the American people supporting us, the whole world and the United Nations supporting us. And I do not think any decent, honorable person would ever suggest anything of that nature. So, I would discount it, but I would simply say that you separate that from the political process that is going on. Nobody would make a decision based on some political certainly not me. I have been through World War II, and I have been trying to keep our kids from you know, try to find a peaceful solution to this. So, you have to raise it, but I am offended that anybody would even suggest that. Are we closer to war today? I mean, there seems to be an escalation and turning up the heat in general. I was asked that a minute ago. We are still giving these sanctions a chance to work. We are still moving forces. I will tell you, I am, I'd say, as concerned, if not increasingly concerned, about the lives of Americans. I mean, we still have some supplies there, thank heaven. But it is so brutal and so inhumane and so directly in contravention of international law that I am increasingly concerned about that. You saw some reports I did in the morning paper about testimony about the condition under which some of these guests I mean, hostages are being held. That worries me. Anytime an American citizen is held against his or her will, of course, the President is concerned about that. Is there any way you can get aid to them short of war? And we are looking at every possibility every possibility. Now, I understand that there was going to be an attempt by the Americans to convey the U.S. desire to resupply the Embassy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexchangewithreportersthepersiangulfcrisis0", "title": "Exchange With Reporters on the Persian Gulf Crisis", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-with-reporters-the-persian-gulf-crisis-0", "publication_date": "31-10-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2978, "text": "Has the Charge told the Iraqis that we intend to do that? I am not sure about that, but I think the loudest signal on that was the action taken at the United Nations. And that gets through to Saddam Hussein. I mean, clearly, he sees his continued isolation. Clearly, he feels the condemnation of the entire world of this kind of inhumane activity. But whether there is been a direct contact from Mr. Howell in our Embassy in Kuwait, I do not know about it, and I'd be inclined to doubt that because of the inhumane way in which our Embassy is isolated. If the Iraqis refuse to allow the Embassy to be resupplied, would the U.S. then ask that all the Americans, including the civilians, be permitted to evacuate the Embassy? I'd request that right now. Anybody should have free access to come or go where they want to.  They ought not to have to go be marched off as prisoners. And so, clearly, I'd call on them, and so is the United Nations. This is in keeping with the United Nations condemnation. Are you going to keep them there now that the U.N. has at least given you the right to resupply them? I think we have to look at that. And the main thing is, at this juncture, there are priorities to be sure people have enough to eat and that they are not put under continued duress there. Well, have you made your point? Is it necessary to have them there anymore? There are other Americans there, and always your Embassy has kind of a consular service to try to service the concerns of other citizens. But as others are brutalized and thus sent into hiding, why, that function becomes a little more blurred. So, I just do not know the answer to that. If they blocked resupply, would that be the sort of provocation you have spoken about earlier? Either it would be directly contravening a mandate from the United Nations, and we would view that very seriously, yes. I cannot go into hypothesis. I can understand why you want to know that, why the American people would want to, but it would not be good for me to signal what I might or might not do.  they can hold out. I think we have varying estimates of time. We can talk to them. ENTITY, some people what a drop-dead date is, a pullout date it might be.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexchangewithreportersthepersiangulfcrisis0", "title": "Exchange With Reporters on the Persian Gulf Crisis", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-with-reporters-the-persian-gulf-crisis-0", "publication_date": "31-10-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2991, "text": "I have been talking with a lot of veterans, and a lot of them respect you as Commander in Chief. Some of them are not so sure. Do you feel like you have something to prove to them? No more than to any other Americans, except I think that the veterans of this country are entitled to know what they fought for in the Second World War is not going to be squandered at the end of the cold war. We understood, I think all of us understood, what we had to do as a country when communism rose at the end of the Second World War and took over Eastern Europe. And basically there was nothing we could do about it. I think everybody knew there was nothing we could do about that. But we were able to draw a line in the sand in Europe; we were able to limit the expansion in Korea. Maybe we made some mistakes in overreacting not perhaps just in Vietnam but in Central America because we were so worried about communism. But at least we did do that. We contained communism until it could collapse of its own failures and the truth reaching in to all these Communist countries. And even when we erred, we did so with-in good faith I think. Now, at the end of the cold war, people are having a lot of questions about what is our national defense for or how do we keep our prestige alive and what is our job now in the world. And what I owe them is to make sure that we always have a strong, well-prepared, well-motivated, highly supportive military and that we move to contain the chaos and madness that is still abroad in the world and limit it so that our very existence is not again threatened by alien powers and so we never again have to do a D-Day. I owe them that. And I am going to do my best to pay them. Do you feel comfortable in your role as Commander in Chief? I worked very hard at it. I have spent an awful lot of time with the service chiefs. I have spent a good deal of time out and around with the various services. I have tried to get to know pretty well a lot of the officers who have to make recommendations on policies and then have to carry them out. I have really worked at it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithharrysmithcbsnews", "title": "Interview With Harry Smith of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-harry-smith-cbs-news", "publication_date": "05-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2992, "text": "If you come to the Presidency from a Governorship, you only have experience insofar as any of your forces, that is, our National Guard had been involved in something like Desert Storm, or if you have got to call them up for some terrible emergency. It is something that I knew I'd have to invest a lot of time and effort in, especially at the end of the cold war. A Governor could more easily move into the role of Commander in Chief during the cold war because the road map was a lot clearer. So I have had to devote a good deal of time to it and still do. But it is something I enjoy, something I believe in, and something that is very important to me. The lives of these men on this ship are very precious to me. And I am well aware that if I send them out into harm's way, I need to be as right as God will let me be right and that this enormous power the United States has now has its limits and its possibilities and clearly its responsibilities. It is hard to be in Europe now during this time, especially in places that you have been and places you will go, and not do some soul-searching. Have you been doing some? I think everybody who is been part of this experience is so overwhelmed by the magnitude of the effort, by the level of courage and will that was required to prevail and how-it was not a foregone conclusion. And it is made me think more deeply, more soberly, more prayerfully even, about the responsibilities that I have now and the problems that we are facing now. Has it made you think or reconsider at all your own lack of service during the Vietnam war? Not in that way, not in the way you ask it. I thought then, based on what I knew then, and I knew quite a bit for a person my age because I'd studied a lot of the documents, that our involvement was an error and that I should try to do what I could honorably to oppose it and to change it. I still believe that. But I think that military service is an honorable thing, and it is something that in that sense I wish I had experienced. And none of us can control the time and place in which we live and the kinds of things that happen. We can only control our reaction to it. At the time I did the best I could.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithharrysmithcbsnews", "title": "Interview With Harry Smith of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-harry-smith-cbs-news", "publication_date": "05-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2993, "text": "And you know, of course, from what came out that I felt-I had very mixed feelings about it. I tried to get myself even back into the draft because I was so confused about it. But I did the best I could at that time, and I am doing the best I can now. One of the things that I think we learned from that war is that even when we are extremely well-motivated, heroic, and willing to die in large numbers, we cannot win a fight for someone else. We can support other people on their own land fighting for their own destiny, but we cannot win a fight for someone else. There are limits to what we can do. And the enormous reaction after that war happened and after the South Vietnamese forces collapsed 10 days after our final withdrawal almost caused our country to go into a shell for a while. First we overreached, and then we did not do perhaps what we should have done to sort of stick a stake in the ground. And what I am determined to do is learn as much as I can from history but not be imprisoned by it and certainly not be bogged down by it. I have a job to do now. And nobody else in the world has it but me. And one thing I owe these people who are in the armed services is to get up every day and do it the very best I can, unencumbered by anything anybody else says about it but always listening to other people. Along these lines, are you still going to pursue sanctions against North Korea? We are going to take the sanctions debate to the United Nations. There is still time for North Korea to change its course. There is still time for North Korea to work with other countries. It is important that the American people understand what is at stake here. Since I have been President they have let us inspect, because we worked very hard at it, all their facilities for what they are doing now and what they might do in the near future. They have not permitted us to go back and inspect for what they did back in 1989 before I took office. The international inspectors say that means they could divert and may have already diverted nuclear fuel for nuclear weapons. Now, they gave their word they would not do that, and they gave their word they'd let us inspect. They deal with a lot of countries that are rogue countries that promote terrorism. We feel that they ought to keep their word. And if they do not , then we feel we have to seek sanctions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithharrysmithcbsnews", "title": "Interview With Harry Smith of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-harry-smith-cbs-news", "publication_date": "05-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3009, "text": "I was going to kick off, as the British representative. As you know, the peace process in Northern Ireland is at a critical stage and facing possible disaster at the moment. The Irish Prime Minister, the Catholic Deputy Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, moderate voices in both north and south have no less than 40 editorials in the American newspapers, including in the Washington Post and the New York Times, have called for decommissioning of weapons. It is time, indeed, it is well past time for the IRA to honor its commitment to the Good Friday peace agreement by surrendering its weapons. Is it now also time now for U.S., as you prepare to visit Britain, to help break the logjam by calling on Sinn Fein and its IRA associates to move on surrendering of weapons and bring back stability to Northern Ireland? We strongly the support of Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern's attempts to enact the Good Friday agreement. And one of the crucial points is decommissioning. And my Government stands side by side with those two governments and those two leaders in urging all sides to decommission, to disarm, and to enact the Good Friday agreements. The situation in Northern Ireland is coming to a critical stage. I look forward to talking to my friend about the issue. But there should be no mistake that we believe the decommissioning part of the Good Friday agreement must be upheld. ENTITY, you are coming close to Italy and to the Holy See. Yes, I am looking forward to it. What do you expect from your first meeting with His Holiness the Pope, considering his position on abortions, stem cell, the death penalty? Well, I expect to talk to a very principled man who speaks from strong convictions. And I look forward to being in the presence of a great world leader. In my speech in Warsaw, I reminded people that His Holiness and his influence had amazing effect on transforming-an amazing effect to encourage freedom. I believe-I truly believe he is a great world leader, and I appreciate his efforts of reconciliation and healing. In my country, the Holy Father has an enormous impact, because the leaders of the Catholic Church, for example, stand strong on the principle of life. They also stand strong on making sure that those who have no voice are heard. And I respect the Catholic Church; I respect the leadership. And I look forward to a very frank discussion. This will be my first chance to have met the Holy Father.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3010, "text": "It is not my first time to Rome, though. You cannot help but be excited and be thinking about being in the presence of a great leader, a man who has got such depth, such spiritual strength and depth. And he is had an enormous impact on the world. And so I look forward to that, and I also look forward to seeing Rome again. I was there to visit my daughter, who went to school at the American School in Rome for a 6-month period of time. Laura and I went over to visit her; I believe it was in the fall of '98, right after my reelection as Governor of Texas. We had a wonderful experience, and I am looking forward to going back. ENTITY, the strong U.S. dollar is getting a real problem for the U.S. export industry. Are you worried about this? And a question related to this, the European countries a year ago, when they have been here at the IMF/World Bank meeting, they were talking about taking the role of an engine for the world economy. Do you think, or do you expect them to take this role, and, if, what do you think they are going to do? If the IMF should take a strong role for-- No, the European countries taking a-- Well, I think this. I think that-let me answer the dollar question second. First, as to the role of market-oriented economies and democracies, we do have a role. And the first step is to make sure our economies are strong and that we trade freely between ourselves. That is why I urge-as a matter of fact today, if I am not mistaken, the EU Trade Commissioner and Ambassador Zoellick, the trade commissioner for the U.S., are making a joint statement-if it is not today, it is soon-about the need to have a new global round of trade. In other words, I do believe that those of us who have got rule of law and transparency in our economies, who have got essentially market-oriented economies, have an opportunity to help spread wealth around the world. In other words, if our economies do not grow, it is very difficult for African nations to grow. Because I remind you, I submit the only way for growth is for commerce and trade and capital to exchange across borders. So we do have a-but we have got to make sure our own economies grow.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3011, "text": "And part of the problem I think you are alluding to is the fact that our economy has slowed down. And so we have-and I will talk about this, what we have done to, you know, enhance economic growth-one, we have got a tax stimulus package that is going to be kicking in here soon. About $40 billion will be injected into our economy over the next 3 months in terms of rebates. So that should help bolster consumer activity. Secondly, the Fed has continued to act to cut rates. And whether they will or not in the future is up to Mr. Greenspan. It is an independent part of our Government. But nevertheless, I can safely say to our partners, we are taking steps necessary to make sure our economy recovers, and that includes, by the way, addressing energy. And needless to say, we had a very frank discussion about energy in my last trip to Europe, and I suspect we will have another frank discussion about energy. One of the things-the Prime Minister of Canada and I have had a very interesting relationship, and one that will continue to grow, is over energy. He knows full well- and Canada, by the way, is now the largest supplier of energy to the United States, and there are some great opportunities for us to enhance natural gas deliverability into our country by cooperating in our own hemisphere . My only point is that I will assure my friends and our trading partners that we are doing our part to strengthen our economy, but we have got to work to make sure we reduce trade barriers in order for prosperity to continue. The dollar is what it is based upon market. And the reason I say that is, our Government will not artificially enter markets. The market decides the strength of the dollar. And I would urge other countries, now, to do the same thing. A strong dollar has got, obviously, benefits and problems for us. One, it is harder to export, but it also helps attract capital. And much of our economy relies upon investors investing in the U.S. because of the dollar. And so we understand the pluses and minuses and, therefore, let the market determine the float of the dollar. I do not know if that answered your question properly. My question is-I tried to follow up his question. So, ENTITY, you met Prime Minister Koizumi last month, and it was a very good meeting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3012, "text": "But Prime Minister Koizumi tried hard to make serious structural reform, and then the Japanese economy continued to decline, and then the yen rate-the result is a weak yen and a stronger dollar. So, President, are you concerned about such a weak yen? And may I-President, my second part of the question is on Kyoto Protocol issues. And President, you know the Japanese Government have been trying to persuade the United States to participate in Kyoto agreement, but the U.S. is still reluctant to join. So my question is, what will be the U.S. reaction if Japan move forward to sign the Kyoto agreement without U.S. commitment to join the agreement? Well, first I did have a great visit with your Prime Minister. He is tackling a very tough economic situation, a huge amount of debt. And he is willing to work hard to restructure and reform the economy so that there is, in fact, transparency and reality in the assessment of the Japanese economy. And I appreciate that a lot. I said in my statement with him at Camp David that we firmly stand with him on his reforms. And of course there may be a consequence as to the yen and dollar relationship, but the market ought to make that decision. I believe Japan-and we hope that Japan does restructure her economy and fully address the loans and the debt overhang in a very constructive, forthright manner. I believe the Prime Minister intends to do that, and I urge him and continue to encourage him to do so. And I appreciate his willingness to take on this very difficult issue, and I think the Japanese people appreciate that as well. Secondly, we also had a long discussion about Kyoto, as I have with many of the leaders around the world, and I made it clear to all the world leaders that our country supports the goals. We just have differences on the methodology. I reminded the people that we spend a lot of money on understanding global warming, that we approach the issue from a science-based perspective, that the goals are unrealistic, however, and that the United States Congress-Senate made it very clear that they were unrealistic with a 95-to-nothing vote and that my assessment of the situation was upfront.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3013, "text": "I explained to them as clearly as I could that our Nation will work to develop a strategy that other nations can understand clearly, but that they should make no mistake about it, that the idea of this particular treaty-of which there was a goal of-for example, setting a goal of carbon reductions by 1990-something less than the 1990 emissions was something that our country was unable to withstand. You know, some leaders were more sympathetic than others, I must confess. Nevertheless, I do believe that people appreciated the frank assessment, and I believe they are going to appreciate the strategy that we lay out over time to help meet the needs. Each country has to make its own mind up as to how to proceed with this issue. Each country must-the parliaments of these countries must deliberate. The governments must be straightforward, it seems like to me, about the consequences. And we will see how other nations-I know how other nations have accepted my declaration; we will see how they handle it with their own internal politics regarding this issue. But we can continue to cooperate and will cooperate on technology transfers. You know, a new generation of nuclear power and the capacity to be able to handle the waste in a technologically feasible way makes a lot of sense. And our Nation is more than willing to invest in new technologies and to look at how to make the world more clean. I reminded the ministers and the leaders that this also relates to energy. And as one of the trading partners, significant trading partners for many countries, it seems like the nations would want our economy to continue to grow. And yet, in order to do so, we must address our energy needs. But make no mistake about it, when you import nearly 60 percent of your product from overseas, that is a dependency upon foreign sources that can create instability. Secondly, we have got to find-and the State of California was the best in conservation in the Nation. They are the best at putting conservation practices in place, but they ran out of energy. And so on the one hand, we have got to do a better job of conservation, and we will. The Vice President has spent a lot of time talking about that. But we have got to find more energy. They had not built a powerplant in 12 years in the State of California. When you grow your State the way they have-in other words, the demand increases the way it has and there is no supply, it creates a problem. And we have got to address that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3014, "text": "And it must be-and I put this in the context of an environmental strategy. And the two go hand in hand as far as we are concerned. I talked very frankly to leaders around the table about the need for us to continue to come up with safe alternatives, safe disposal practices for nuclear energy. But our Nation needs to look into it, and so does the developing world, by the way, it seems like to me. And you know, some in Europe have a different perspective about nuclear energy. It is an important discussion, and we will continue to consult with our friends. First of all, I wanted to thank you for inviting us all in-it is a high-working in my life. President Putin yesterday suggested that he wants a new security structure in Europe that would either involve Russia in NATO or NATO disbanded and a new infrastructure with Russia in it. I wonder whether you think such integration can really be on the table. And also, the Russians and the Chinese have just concluded a new treaty on friendship. And both of those countries are firmly opposed to NMD, so I wonder if you are concerned about that issue. I can understand nations that share a large border wanting to work on a friendship agreement. It makes sense to me. First, let me say, we did have a very constructive meeting in Slovenia. It was a very forthright, very straightforward, very open discussion about issues. And I made it very clear to Mr. Putin that Russia is no longer our Nation's enemy. And therefore, I do not think-the therefore of that is that we should not view each other with suspicion, that we ought to think seriously about working together to get rid of a document that codified a cold war distrust. It was a document-when Russia and America divided the world into armed camps and we stared each other down with missiles. I have spoken very clearly to the President that it is time for new leadership to develop a new strategic framework for peace. The threats that the ABM Treaty addressed no longer exists-no longer exists. cyberterrorism, fundamentalist extremists, extremism that certainly threatens us, threatens Israel, who is our strong ally and friend, threatens Russia. We have got to deal with it, the threat in Europe, at some time, perhaps. We must deal with that issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3015, "text": "And one way to do that is coordinate security arrangements, is to talk about how to- as to how to deal with the new threats but also is to be able to have the capacity to rid the world of blackmail, terrorist blackmail. And so we had to have the capacity to shoot somebody's missile down if they threatened us. It is a defense, as opposed to relying on peace-but with offensive weapons, why do not we think about developing defensive systems. So I have read with interest the statements-I have been reading with interest the statements by a lot of people. But this Nation, I am committing this Nation to a more peaceful world by a realistic assessment of the threats. And we have got to address them, and I am going to. And I continue to consult with our allies and friends, which I am confident this topic will come up with Tony Blair. I look forward to explaining him my position. I did so with the Prime Minister; I have done so with the leaders of every nation represented here. I did so with Jean Chretien right here at this table during my first working dinner as the President of the United States. He sat right there, and we had this discussion. I explained to him the philosophy behind my attitudes. I firmly believe it is the right thing to keep the peace. And I look forward to a continued dialog starting next-whenever-Sunday, I guess it is, with Mr. Putin, on this very subject. I am not going to speak for him, but I will tell you, he listened very carefully, and I appreciated that. Can both sides belong to the same structure? Well, first of all, his vision, he mentioned this in our press conference in Slovenia, as well. He talked about a NATO that might at some point include Russia. I think that is what he was saying. In the meantime, however, there is a round of NATO expansion-the practicality is, there is a round of NATO expansion next fall, a year from this coming fall, and I will reiterate what I said. It is not a matter of when-I mean, it is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when. And countries that are making progress toward democracy and working hard to conform to the action plan, we ought to be very forward-leaning toward those countries. I gave it very-you should read my speech. As Russia looks west, she finds no enemies. She finds no enemies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3016, "text": "I know you like energy questions, so I will throw a double-barreled energy question at you. The Canadians are always good about double-barreling. You have expressed a strong desire to get at the natural gas that is in the Northwest Territories. How do you reconcile that with the very intense political pressure to bring the gas south, through Alaska, bypassing the Canadian resources? And secondly, you have talked about a continental energy policy, energy pact. You have got free trades with NAFTA. Would a logical next step, given the United States' great need for water, be a water pact? Let me start with the energy. One, an Alaska pipeline; and secondly, a Canadian pipeline-or perhaps a combination of the two. We have got a debate here in America about whether or not America ought to be exploring for natural gas in parts of our State of Alaska. It is very similar to the Northwest Territories in Canada. The Canadian Government has made- along, I might add, with the tribes in that part of the world-have made the decision that exploration for natural gas would not only be economically beneficial but can be done in a way that does not harm the environment. I agree with their assessment. Whether or not the United States is willing to think along the same lines is an open question that is still going to be debated in the United States Senate. Nevertheless, my attitude is, we need supply. And therefore, I have committed myself to working with the Canadian Government to figure out how to get natural gas into the United States. And we are willing to work with your Government to figure out a way that can expeditiously move gas. He is referring-you know, obviously, to the extent that it would be an American pipeline, a pipeline on American soil would make it easier for me politically. Nevertheless, I am a practical man; I want the gas here. We will continue to work on the Alaska pipeline. I know there is enough reserve to justify a Canadian line. It is conceivable we could have both, that would both feed the midwestern market and the western market. The second issue is hemispheric energy, and that really pertains to-I do not know if you know this, but Mexico is a net importer of gas. And so we have got all of us- three of us are continuing to meet on how best to make sure that all of us are able to fully explore the opportunities in the hemisphere.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3017, "text": "But so long as Mexico imports gas from America, it is gas that ultimately will be replaced by Canada in our market. And we have got to encourage Mexico, and I know that President Fox thinks this way, about enhancing exploration for what he calls dry gas in the country of Mexico. As well, we are working on electricity hookups. And one of the things that the Prime Minister and I have talked about, the possibility of hydroelectric power generating in Canada, moving down through to particularly the Midwest. It requires a significant amount of capital outlay, but nevertheless, it is really worth the discussion. Water is-I am from a part of the world where-where I grew up, there was no water. And at one time, when the price of international crude oil got down to around $10 a barrel, water was more valuable than oil, at least where we live. Water will forever be an issue in the United States, particularly the Western United States. I do not know exactly what you have in mind in terms of importation of water. I presume it is -perhaps some have suggested abandoned pipelines that used to carry energy. I would be open to any discussions. Our Nation must develop a comprehensive water strategy as we head-particularly as these Western States continued to grow. You know, one big debate we have in America is whether or not we build more reservoir space, more water storage, aboveground water storage. It is a battle, needless to say, that pits local conservationists versus those with agricultural interests, for example. And I have looked forward to discussing this with the Prime Minister, should he want to bring it up, at any time, because water is valuable for a lot of our countries. A lot of people do not need it, but when you head south and west, we do need it. What is your vision, your master plan for U.S.-European relations, and more specifically, for U.S.-EU relations for 2008, until 2008 when you leave this house? I like an optimistic man. But nevertheless, I appreciate it. Maybe this would reassure all those who have questions about the U.S. strategy. Well, I appreciate that. Look, when I first went to-my first trip to Europe was an icebreaker. You know, some of the leaders had come here, and we had visited. But a lot of folks had never-you know, they had read things about me, so they were not able to hear my vision.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3018, "text": "They were told things through the newspapers; sometimes things were true, sometimes frankly not so true. But nevertheless, it gave me a chance to have a very honest dialog. Patrice, I think they realize that, one, my Nation is firmly committed to NATO, the expansion of NATO. Our commitment to NATO is real. One of the big issues- that is important for people's vision of the American role-very important. You know, during the course of the campaign, I made it clear that I thought that our military should be used to fight and win war-that is what I thought the military was for-and that I was concerned about peacekeeping missions and that we have got to be very clear about-to our friends and allies about how we use our troops for nation-building exercises, which I have rebuffed as a-basically rebuffed as a kind of a strategy for the military. And as a result of that, some in Europe were very concerned about our presence in the Balkans, for example. We came in together. That is an important statement for people to understand, that our Nation will continue to work with our European friends-in this case, to bring stability to the Balkans and Macedonia. We have got an Ambassador on the ground there working with the EU Ambassador to bring peace. Having said that, it is important, however, to continue to work, though, to replace troops in a responsible manner with civil institutions, civil structures that can do the same thing the troops are doing. We have got to work for a police force and security arrangements that are run locally, so that the NATO troops at some point in time will no longer serve as peacekeepers. Now, that is obviously more opportunistic to do that in Bosnia than it is in Kosovo at this point in time, but nevertheless, we must do so. In terms of the EU, I believe that we can have a very constructive relationship with the EU. Obviously, there are some concerns where we differ, but we should not allow these differences-like biotechnology, for example, which I talked about today in my speech regarding developing nations. The U.N. came out-this is kind of an aside-the U.N. came out with a very interesting study that made it clear that biotech and biotechnology will enhance the ability of poor nations to grow more plentiful amounts of food. We agree with that position. And yet, we have a disagreement with our European friends on that, it seems like.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3019, "text": "Nevertheless, we should not allow those disagreements to undermine and to kind of diminish the fact that we share the same values. And it is the values that unite-not just the history but the values that unite America with Europe. The values of freedom, free press-I emphasize free press being exercised right here in the Family Dining Room at the White House-free speech-it will be exercised in Genoa, I suspect--free elections, free religion, basic values that we share. And our European friends, I believe, are beginning to understand that about me, that I respect Europe, I respect our history, but most of all, I respect the values of Europe, and that I will not let differences of opinion get in the way for the larger vision-and that is a Europe free and whole, a Europe expanded, and a Europe in partnership with America. And we will have frank discussions. Look, the only thing I can do in these meetings, and I will do-I will just tell people what I think. I will represent my Government in a way that is forthright, transparent. And some will like it, and some will not like it. But they will always know that I will be willing to listen, discuss, and consult on issues of importance. I would not be sitting here as the President if I did not have an optimistic view of how we can work together. And secondly, I think people will find that, as I said today, that I do embrace a kind of compassionate conservatism in the international arena that recognizes that those of us who are fortunate have an obligation to help the developing nations, the sick. It is unbelievable that on my watch and on the watch of the other leaders around the table that Africa, for example, suffers the pandemic that it does. And we must come together, and we must take this issue incredibly seriously and work together to help develop-help Africans develop a strategy of education, treatment, and cure that will work, and help fund it, and crank up our NGOs to go help. And I think the people will see the strategy and-- Does it look to you that these big meetings are increasingly being held behind armed camps? You were in Quebec City; WTO is going to meet in the desert. In Genoa, they are on a boat, some of them, and Canada is talking about making it on a mountaintop next year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3020, "text": "Let me say, I-in Quebec City, I do not know what percentage, but I would say clearly 95 percent of the people were there to stage a peaceful protest about a variety of issues. Some anarchists wanted to make it difficult for the Canadian Government to conduct a meeting. And in all due respect, those who try to disrupt and destroy and hurt are really defeating the cause of-their cause, it seems like to me. I think a lot of people in the world are just kind of sick of it. You know, secondly, as I said, the people who are protesting are hurting the poorer nations. If they are trying to undo trade, it seems like to me, their strategy and their philosophy will lock people into poverty. And I strongly disagree with them, and I made that clear in a speech today. You need to get the exact wording in the transcript. There should be no question about my view, about what these voices of isolationism and protection are doing. They can couch it in any words they want, but they are condemning people to poverty, as far as I am concerned. They need to go and ask the people. Ask the African nations; ask what their hope is. Find out from the people that they are supposedly speaking on behalf of exactly what their opinion is, and they are going to find a different point of view. I thought Quebec City was-first of all, I got to see Quebec City in kind of a nearempty state, which was beautiful. But obviously, any time you are meeting and you have got issues to discuss and there is tear gas wafting through the air, it kind of changes the atmosphere somewhat. But that is not going to prevent me from having a good dialog with the leaders. The truth of the matter is, the discussions inside the halls of these buildings are fairly immune to what is going on. And the other thing is, there are some there, they just want to get their picture on TV. Are you concerned about Argentina? I am concerned about Argentina. I am concerned about Argentina, Marc . And our Nation is very much-you know, watching the situation very carefully. Late last night off the news-I am sure the news reported-it looked like there was an agreement between the governors and the central government as to how to rein in spending, which is a very important step in a-direction that Argentina needs to go.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists7", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-7", "publication_date": "17-07-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3038, "text": "I'd like to say a special word of thanks to David Kessler for the work he did historic work he did at the FDA when he was here. Thank you, Dr. Koop, and members of the public community who are here. To Members of Congress, the attorneys general, the representatives of plaintiffs in the private litigation and we have one of the injured parties here representing all of them we thank all of them for coming today. This is a time of prosperity and hope and optimism for America, with our economy improving, making progress on our social problems, our efforts to lead the world to a more prosperous and peaceful future making headway. But I think we all know that this country still has some significant challenges, especially in the health field. And if we think about what we want America to be like in the 21st century, the health of our people and especially the health of our children must be paramount in our thinking, in our vision, and in our efforts. That is why a year ago I worked with the FDA and we launched this nationwide effort to protect our children from the dangers of tobacco by reducing youth access to tobacco products, by preventing companies from advertising to our children. The purpose of the FDA rule was to reduce youth smoking by 50 percent within 7 years. Earlier this year, a Federal judge in North Carolina said that the FDA has the authority to regulate tobacco products to protect the health of our children. There have also been other examples of litigation progress, as you know, brought by private plaintiffs and by the attorneys general. Now, these victories for public health drove the tobacco companies to the bargaining table. They extracted concessions that would have been literally unthinkable just a short time ago. I want to say a special word of thanks to the attorneys general and the other parties who worked hard to negotiate this settlement. Everyone knows we would not be here had it not been for their foresight, their determination, and their relentless efforts. Now we have this unprecedented opportunity to enact comprehensive tobacco legislation, working with all the parties involved, the Members of Congress, the attorneys general, the representatives of injured parties, the public health community, the tobacco farmers, and others. We have moved from confrontation and denial and inertia to the brink of action on behalf of our children, and that is all to the good. the dramatic reduction of teen smoking. In the coming weeks I will invite congressional leaders from both parties to the White House to launch a bipartisan effort to enact such legislation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedtobaccolegislationandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Tobacco Legislation and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-tobacco-legislation-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "17-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3039, "text": "There are five key elements that must be at the heart of any national tobacco legislation. That is why I believe the first thing any tobacco legislation must include is a comprehensive plan to reduce teen smoking, including tough penalties. These penalties should be non-tax-deductible, uncapped, and escalating to give the tobacco industry the strongest possible incentive to stop targeting children as new customers. One of the surest ways of reducing youth smoking is to increase the price of cigarettes. Today I call for a combination of industry payments and penalties to increase the price of cigarettes by up to a dollar and a half a pack over the next decade, as needed, to meet our youth reduction targets. And I call upon the House to follow the lead of the United States Senate and repeal the provision giving the tobacco industry a $50 billion tax credit. Second, any legislation must affirm the full authority of the FDA to regulate tobacco products. I believe the FDA's jurisdiction over tobacco products must be as strong and effective as its authority over drugs and devices. In particular, legislation cannot impose any special procedural hurdles on the FDA's regulation of tobacco products. Third, effective legislation must include measures to hold the industry accountable, especially in any efforts to market products to children, while insisting on changes in the way it does business. I ask the industry again to make a voluntary commitment to stop advertising to children. And I call upon Congress to pass legislation providing for broad document disclosure so that the public can learn everything the tobacco companies know about the health effects of their products and their attempts to market to our children. Fourth, Federal tobacco legislation must aim not only to reduce youth smoking but to meet other health goals as well. These include the reduction of secondhand smoke, the expansion of smoking prevention and cessation programs, the strengthening of international efforts to control tobacco, and the provision of funds for medical research and other important health objectives. We must build on the bipartisan agreement to fund children's health care in the recent balanced budget. And finally, any tobacco legislation must protect tobacco farmers and their communities. We know that tobacco farmers are honest, hardworking people, most of whom live and work on small, family owned farms. In some States, entire communities rely on income from the tobacco crop. Any legislation must protect these farmers, their families, and their communities from loss of income. Let me say in closing, I want to thank the Vice President especially, who cares so passionately about this issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedtobaccolegislationandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Tobacco Legislation and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-tobacco-legislation-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "17-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3040, "text": "He is played a key role in our efforts to protect our children from the dangers of tobacco. I have asked him to take the lead in building broad bipartisan support around the country for our plan. I also want to thank Secretary Shalala, Secretary Glickman, and Bruce Reed, and all those who worked so hard on our administration's analysis of the proposed settlement and where we are. And finally, let me say again, we would not be here if it were not for all the people in this room and the countless others they represent around the country. To me, this is not about money. It is not about how much money we can extract from the tobacco industry. It is about fulfilling our duties as parents and responsible adults to protect our children and to build the future of this country. We are doing everything we can in this administration to give parents the tools they need to raise their children, but parents have to be our partners as well. If this is not just about money, we have to recognize that even beyond the tobacco companies and all of us in this room, every parent in America has a responsibility to talk to their children about the dangers of tobacco, illegal drugs, and other things that can hurt them. We know if we have strong parental responsibility here, they can make a great deal of difference in protecting our children as well. If we take responsibility, if we pass this legislation, if we do what we should here, if the tobacco industry will work with us, if other Members of Congress in both parties will work with us, we will have gone a very long way toward creating the state of health for our children that will make America an even greater nation in the new century. ENTITY, what are the chances of the Congress adopting your policy? Well, first of all, I was encouraged by some of the comments that were made by some industry representatives. I think that they know that they have to have Federal legislation. They have an interest in that as well. And I would hope that they would be willing to work with us. But we cannot have the FDA crippled here, and we have to have real and meaningful penalties if the targets for youth smoking are not met. And so I feel very good about that. I think the Congress I think it is highly likely that they will take action. When they take action depends, I think, upon when they can work through the issues for themselves and how they decide how to divide up the work among the committees.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedtobaccolegislationandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Tobacco Legislation and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-tobacco-legislation-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "17-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3041, "text": "We could have hearings on this fairly soon, and I would hope to work with the Congress to develop a bill that would embody these principles. ENTITY, you have not said what you are willing to agree to for the tobacco industry. Are you willing to agree to immunity from future liability? Well, I do not think they have asked for future liability, I think they have asked for immunity from liability for past suits. And the question there would be, what are they willing to agree to? They need to come and meet with us. We need to discuss it, and we need to see whether we can embody these five principles. To me, I will say again, this is not primarily about money. This is about changing the behavior of the United States, both the behavior of the tobacco companies, the behavior of the American people, the future behavior of our children. I am trying to create an environment here with these five principles that I believe would achieve that. And if they want to be our partners in it, I think we can get there. Are you willing to put your prestige on the line to ensure that this becomes law? Well, I think my personal prestige on this has been on the line for more than a year now. There for a while, I thought more than my prestige was on the line. You know, for a person involved in public life in Washington today, personal prestige may be an oxymoron. But at least you still have your neck most days. What do you say to the people ENTITY, how do you protect the well-being of tobacco farmers sounds like you are going to take away their livelihood. Well, there are a number of things which can be done, and I do not want to get into the details. Secretary Glickman can talk about it. But we have had farmers in various sectors in our agriculture society facing constricted incomes before, and we have done things which helped them. There was a for example, I remember a few years ago something that affected dairy farmers in my State. There was a massive buyout program for dairy farmers, and in a lot of States like Arkansas, there were any number of small farmers that were having a very difficult time who had a chance to start their life on a different basis. I do not want to minimize this. Tobacco has a very high return per acre. You cannot just say to a tobacco farmer to go plant soybeans, even if the soil will hold them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedtobaccolegislationandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Tobacco Legislation and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-tobacco-legislation-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "17-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3042, "text": "This is, from an agricultural point of view, economically complex. But nonetheless, we have a responsibility to these people. They have not done anything wrong. They have not done anything illegal. They are good, hard-working, taxpaying citizens, and they have not caused this problem. And we cannot let them, their families, or their communities just be crippled and broken by this. And I do not think any member of the public health community wants to do that. And the Agriculture Department and I am personally very committed to this part; to me, this is one of the five things we have to do. We are trying to change America and make everybody whole. And they deserve a chance to have their lives and be made whole and go on with the future as well, and I am determined to see that they are a part of this. What do you say to the attorneys who thought this was a good deal and very proudly proclaimed it? Well, first of all, they were a part of all these ongoing reviews. Everybody was heard in this review process. And secondly, they all recognize, too, that this agreement has to be ratified by Congress. The tobacco companies recognize that. That means that all of us who are part of that process are, in effect, parties to this case, too. And that is the way you need to look at this. We are building on their deal. We are not rejecting their agreement. We are building on it. We are not rejecting what the attorneys general did. We are building on it. Look, if it had not been for what they did, we would not be here. I realize that there were two great things that started this. One is what Dr. Kessler and what we did at the FDA, and the fact that our administration was the first one ever willing to take this on. The other was the actions by the attorneys general and the private lawsuits that got the disclosure of the documents that created a total change in the public attitude and the public efforts here. And then long before that, there were the efforts of all of these people here from the public health community who have been telling us all this for years. And they had the public primed for it. Then the lawsuits brought about the disclosures, and then the FDA was moving. Those three things together, I think and of course, now there have been a lot of congressional hearings. Representative Waxman had a full head of hair when he came to Congress before he started on tobacco.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedtobaccolegislationandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Tobacco Legislation and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-tobacco-legislation-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "17-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3043, "text": "And so I think you have got to give to me, we are building on this progress, and that is the way you have to look at this. We are trying to do the best thing for the country in a way that is consistent with the agreement they made. We are building on the agreement. We are not tearing it down. We are building on it. And I think we can get legislation that will reflect it. What do you think about the string of air crashes, ENTITY, that have happened Bosnia, the German representative that was killed? We do not have all the facts yet. I was briefed early this morning on it, and obviously I am profoundly concerned for the diplomat and the people that were on the aircraft and their families. But I cannot comment on the facts of it until we absolutely know what the facts are. I must say, we are making on balance, we are making some progress in Bosnia again. The events of the last several weeks are hopeful for the peace process and the Dayton accord. What do you have to say about the air safety, and what are you going to be doing about that? I had a talk with the Secretary of Defense about them the day before yesterday, and I think we have to, first of all, analyze each and every one to see whether there is some pattern that would require some kind of review by the Air Force or whether it is just an unfortunate stream of coincidences that they all happened at the same time. I noted one that I learned about this morning involved Air National Guard planes, for example. That may or may not have anything to do with any problem with planes or anything like that. I would not over jump to conclusions about this. Remember, every year I try to say this once a year, so I want to say it now it is easy for the American people to forget the risks that our men and women in uniform undertake. Every year we lose a couple hundred people serving the United States in the military in peacetime. I am heartsick about the plane we are missing off the coast of Africa that took a demining team in there to continue our work against landmines.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedtobaccolegislationandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Tobacco Legislation and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-tobacco-legislation-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "17-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3047, "text": "As you have watched what is happening in Congress, do you feel that House Republicans are coming any closer to anything that you could sign? If they offered you more, ENTITY, would you be willing then to negotiate things, like a delay in Obamacare in the individual mandate? We are not going to delay the Affordable Care Act. There are millions of Americans right now who do not have health insurance. And they are finally, after decades, going to be in a position where they can get affordable health care just like everybody else. And that means that their families, their kids, themselves, they have got the basic security that you and I enjoy. And the notion that we would even delay them getting that kind of peace of mind, potentially going to a doctor to get treated for illnesses that they currently have simply because the Republicans have decided, ideologically, that they are opposed to the Affordable Care Act is not something that we are going to be discussing. As we talk, ENTITY, we are on a day when, obviously, a shut-down is looming. You said earlier that you were going to be talking to the leaders. Did you mean Republican leaders and if so, which one? Well, I am going to be talking to all of them. And we still have a window; there is still an opportunity during the course of this day to avert a shut down and make sure that we are paying our bills. What can you offer? ENTITY, when you say what can I offer, I should not have to offer anything. They are not doing me a favor by paying for things that they have already approved for the government to do. That is part of their basic function of government. That is not doing me a favor. That is doing what the American people sent them here to do, carrying out their responsibilities. I have said consistently that I am always happy to talk to Republicans and Democrats about how we shape a budget that is investing in things like early childhood education, rebuilding our roads and bridges and putting people back to work, growing our economy, making sure that we have got the research and development we need to stay at the cutting edge and that deals with some of our long- term debt issues. But we are not going to accomplish those things if one party to this conversation says that the only way that they come to the table is if they get 100 percent of what they want. And if they do not , they threaten to burn down the house.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosallthingsconsidered", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio's All Things Considered", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-all-things-considered", "publication_date": "30-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3048, "text": "People who follow this closely, ENTITY, will know that you have negotiated in the past with Speaker Boehner and those negotiations have often fallen apart; that your vice president has negotiated with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and sometimes those negotiations have succeeded, but there do not appear to be negotiations going on now. Do you believe there is anyone in Congress in a position of authority you can deal with who could deliver an agreement to you? I like Speaker Boehner. I like Mitch McConnell. I think they are, you know, in challenging positions because right now they have been unwilling to say no to the most extreme parts of their caucus. And at the point where they are willing to say no to the most extreme parts of their caucus, I think that there are a whole bunch of Republicans both in the Senate and the House who recognize this is a bad strategy. I am in conversations with those senators on a regular basis, and some of those House members, and they recognize that the greatest country on Earth should not be doing business this way. And I think if John Boehner stood up and said, we are going to make sure that the government stays open, we are going to make sure that basic government functions are being carried out, we are going to make sure that America pays its bills on time, like we always have throughout our history, but I am still going to take principled stands on a whole range of issues where I differ with ENTITY. I think the vast majority of American people and the majority of Republicans would say that is the kind of leadership we expect. Would he lose his job? But it requires some willingness on his part to put the long-term interests of the country ahead of short-term political interests. Ironically, over time, I actually think that would be good politics. Look, I want a successful Republican Party in the sense of one that is interested in governing. You know, Congress is going to go back and forth over the next five, 10, 20 years. And what we want is both parties to be able to have principled disagreements, to have very tough fights, but to make sure that the underlying stability of the country is maintained and that we are not demonizing the other side, we are not locking ourselves into ideological positions that we cannot move off of, we are not boxing ourselves in. And unfortunately, that is what we have seen -- that is the pattern that we have seen over the last several years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosallthingsconsidered", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio's All Things Considered", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-all-things-considered", "publication_date": "30-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3049, "text": "Let me mention, ENTITY, that one reason this is such an emotional moment is that people on both sides of the debate over the Affordable Care Act seem to believe that once the individual mandate takes effect and people begin receiving subsidies, the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, stays forever -- cannot be removed, because there will be political support for it. Do you believe that? Keep in mind -- if you are a Republican -- and we have heard some Republicans make this argument -- some of those who are leading the charge on this make this argument -- and essentially, what they are saying is, once this is fully implemented and millions of people who currently do not have health care have health care at reasonable prices and protections are in place for consumers across the board, that it will be sufficiently successful and popular that people will not want to repeal it. So the notion is we have got to stop it before people like it too much. Well, part of the argument is sometimes, people come to like things that the government cannot afford anymore. Well, this is -- this is the argument that was made with respect to Social Security; this is the argument that was made to Medicare. It turns out, actually, people liked it, and we could afford it. And unlike the prescription drug plan that was passed by Republicans, which now is very popular with seniors, although at the time that it was passed was actually less popular than the Affordable Care Act, according to the polls -- we paid for the Affordable Care Act. It does not add to the deficit. If the assumptions in current law held. Well -- but the assumptions so far not only have held, they have actually exceed expectations. Health care costs have gone up slower since we passed the Affordable Care Act. There were great predictions coming from the Republicans that health care costs would go up even faster; that has not happened. There were predictions that the market places that we are setting up -- essentially, the group plans where people buy health insurance -- would not offer a good deal to consumers. And so far, the bids have come in from insurance companies, and lo and behold, they have actually come under the estimates that the government had so far. So the truth is that every prediction about how bad the Affordable Care Act would be for individual consumers out there has not proven to be true. That is ENTITY speaking yesterday at the White House. Now, Medicare -- the program for seniors ENTITY mentioned -- has actually turned out to be hard work to afford.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosallthingsconsidered", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio's All Things Considered", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-all-things-considered", "publication_date": "30-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3050, "text": "The cost of all health care has been rising for years. And one major question about the Affordable Care Act is whether it will meet its goal of containing those costs over time. Despite the government shutdown, the main parts of the law take effect today. Health exchanges are supposed to open; websites and other locations across the country where people without insurance can shop for private plans. I asked ENTITY if he was prepared for significant glitches as the exchanges open. In the first week, first month, first three months, I would suspect that there will be glitches. This is 50 states, a lot of people signing up for something, and there are going to be problems. And I guarantee you, there will be problems because we have got precedent. When Massachusetts, just one state, set this up, it took quite a long time. It took several months before everything was smoothed out. Of course, the same was true with Medicare and Social Security and every other social program that we have set up -- the Children's Health Insurance Program. But what we are confident about is that people will be able to take a look and find out whether this is something that is going to be good for their families. You have talked a lot during your time in office about the widening gap between the rich and everybody else. This is a decades-long trend, but a good part of that trend has now taken part -- taken place on your watch. Overwhelming majority of the increase in income in this country went to the wealthiest 1 percent. Why is that happening on your watch? Well, it is one of my biggest concerns. And part of it has to do with the fact that these long-term trends have accelerated. Globalization, combined with technology, have stripped away a lot of the basic security that middle-income people had because a lot of those middle-income jobs have left. Either they were moved overseas, they were replaced with technology -- whether you are talking about a bank teller, a travel agent, a high-level administrator in a lot of companies, if you go to many manufacturers, it is all roboticized. So some of the -- that is part of the trend. Are your efforts not helping with this? The law was passed under a Democratic Congress. Well, no -- there are no doubts that what we have done has helped. So for example, the changes we made in the tax law that increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans while locking in tax cuts for middle-class Americans, that helped.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosallthingsconsidered", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio's All Things Considered", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-all-things-considered", "publication_date": "30-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3051, "text": "The economist Tyler Cowen was on our program the other day. He'd written a book about income inequality. And he argued, based on his analysis, that it is really inevitable, it is going to get worse, and the thing for public officials to do is to adapt to it rather than try to change it. Well, I do not accept that. America is, always been, at its best when everybody who is willing to work hard has a chance to succeed. I mean, we are seeing the same trends in Scandinavian countries that historically were -- prided themselves on great equality. We have seen it magnified in less developed countries and emerging markets. So these are global trends that we are going to have to fight against. But if we are educating a workforce that has the skills they need to compete, if we have a tax system that is fair and not rewarding those who can afford high-priced accountants and lawyers, if we are rebuilding our infrastructure in this country, not only to make us more competitive but because those create jobs that cannot be exported, if we are increasing a minimum wage so that it is reflective of the same purchasing power that existed many years ago, if we are creating more ladders of opportunity for people who are locked in neighborhoods that have been abandoned and small towns where factories have closed, if we do those things, then we can lessen the impact of these broader market forces. On the one hand, they create a situation in which consumer goods are cheap and they create a situation in which we can have access to goods and services that we would never have had before. On the other hand, it does create a situation in which a lot of the jobs that are created are at the very top, high-skilled, you know, creative work that cannot be replicated, or at the bottom, low-skilled jobs. What we do not have are those jobs in the middle that we have to really focus on building, because we can outcompete anybody when we have smart policies. You have said you will not negotiate over an extension of the debt ceiling. I just want to make sure that I am clear on that. If there is no agreement, if the debt ceiling is -- the debt limit is reached, if the United States is going into default or at risk of going into default, you absolutely will not negotiate, even in that circumstance?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosallthingsconsidered", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio's All Things Considered", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-all-things-considered", "publication_date": "30-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3052, "text": "And the reason, ENTITY, is because if we establish a pattern whereby one faction of one party controlling one chamber in Congress can threaten default, that the United States of America is no longer meeting its obligations and fulfilling the full faith and credit of the United States unless they get a hundred percent of what they want, then we have established a pattern that fundamentally changes the nature of our government. At that point, any president -- not just me -- any president is subject to that kind of blackmail continuously. If you had a Republican president in here and a Democratic speaker said, we are not going to raise the debt ceiling unless you pass background checks on guns; we are not going to pass the debt ceiling unless you raise the corporate income tax by 30 percent, you know, that Republican president would find him or herself in a similar position. Raising the debt ceiling is not raising the debt, it is simply saying Congress is authorizing the Treasury to pay for those things that Congress has already approved. So a potential debt-ceiling crisis approaches, even as the president tries to manage ordinary business. He had hoped to name a new Fed chairman by now, giving Congress time to act this year to find a successor to Ben Bernanke. As he pondered that decision, I asked if the president wants the next Fed chair to change course for the Fed. He began by noting that the Fed is a dual mandate, one part is protecting the currency. Part of that mandate is also full employment, making sure that the economy is growing in such a way that people have the chance to succeed. Should the Fed be doing more in that department? Well, I think that the Fed has to constantly monitor where the economy is moving, but we cannot put the entire burden on the Fed. And this brings us back to the original point about potential government shutdowns or potential default because we are not paying our bills. The -- we have dug ourselves out of a deep hole, and the economy now has grown. We have created jobs for 42 consecutive months. We have created 7.5 million new jobs. Manufacturing's come back in ways that many people would not have anticipated. The deficit, which was the main rationale back in 2011 for Republicans to engage in this brinkmanship, has gone down faster than any time since World War II and has been cut by more than half since I came into office.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosallthingsconsidered", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio's All Things Considered", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-all-things-considered", "publication_date": "30-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3053, "text": "Well, I am glad to see you all and welcome you here, for many of you, for the first time. As you know, in the State of the Union Address I issued a challenge, and as part of my explanation of the New Covenant in challenging citizens to be more responsible, to people of faith and to religious leaders specifically to help us to deal with those problems that we have to deal with person by person and from the inside out, to help us to deal with the problems of teen pregnancy and outof-wedlock birth, to help us to deal with the challenges of excessive violence, to help us to deal with the things that have to be organized and dealt with literally one by one at the grassroots level. And while I think we have to be more tolerant of all people, no matter what their differences are, we need to be less tolerant of conditions that are within our power to change. And as you know now, for 2 years, ever since I took this job, I have been trying to find ways to galvanize the energies of people of faith to work together on a common agenda that nearly all Americans would agree on and, at the same time, to try to respect the differences of opinion and views. Our administration strongly supported the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and we have worked very hard to implement it in a good faith way. And I think an awful lot of people from right across the spectrum of religious affiliations in our country would agree that we have done that. Anyway, if you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer. But the other thing I was going to say today what I said today was that the problems our country faces today are quite profound, you know, the fact that a rising tide is not lifting all boats; that a lot of people, in spite of this remarkable recovery, have not gotten a raise and they are more vulnerable with their health care, their pensions; and the fact a lot of people find their values violated and their security violated by crime and violence and the breakdown of the social order It would be very hard to assert that there are more profound difficulties than the problems of previous days, than the problems that George Washington or Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Roosevelt confronted.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3054, "text": "The difference is that in the information age, which gives us these vast new opportunities because the creation of wealth is based on knowledge and that these people have access to more knowledge than ever before, it is also a great burden because words have greater power today than ever before, not only to build up but also to tear down, to divide, to destroy, to distract. And therefore, in a very profound sense in the modern world, it is more important that people be striving for the kind of spiritual presence of mind and peace of mind that will lead you to use words to build up and to unify, instead of to divide and tear down. And I really do believe that. I think that it is clearly different from any previous time. Words have always been able to wound in letters or speeches or whatever. But the omnipresence of information today and the fact that we are buried in it, it seems to me, imposes an even greater responsibility on people in positions of respect and trust and power to use those words more carefully. The moral crusade elements of the State of the Union Address, teenage pregnancy, as an example, sits well, except that there are investigations into your own conduct which some people say leaves an impression. Is this interfering with your ability to lead that type of crusade? But the one thing that I would say today we live in an age where anybody can say anything and, unlike in previous times, it gets into print. And even if they admit they took money to say it which is what happened in my case a couple of times it still gets wide currency. So there is not much I can do about that. The work I have tried to do to reduce teen pregnancy and out-of-wedlock births generally is something I have been involved in for many years. The life of these young people was very, very different than my life was when I was their age. Their temptations, their travails, it is very, very different and much more difficult for them. And I think we have got to try to find a way to help them walk back from what is now happening. Interestingly enough this is a statistical comment I am making now there is some evidence that the efforts may be beginning to have some impact. The actual numbers of out-of-wedlock births have stabilized in the last 2 or 3 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3055, "text": "The rate of illegitimacy is going up because the rate of childbearing by couples who are young and successful is going down, which is another problem for another discussion. But anyway, I do not see that we have any choice as a people to deal with it, and it is and you know, if folks want to use that as another excuse to attack me, that is their problem, not mine. Related to that, some people suggest that both your welfare reform proposals and the Contract With America's welfare reform proposal takes such Draconian measures against these unwed teen mothers in terms of limits that what it is likely to do is to drive up the abortion rate, not stop the unwanted pregnancy rate but drive up the abortion rate. Well, I do not agree with that in my proposal, and obviously I do not know what would happen in the others, but let us look at that. The abortion rate has been going down in America. And I think it is been going down for maybe because of all the protest against abortion. But I also think that most Americans have deeply ambivalent feelings. That is, I believe that a majority of Americans are pro-choice and anti-abortion. That is, they do not believe that the decision should be criminalized because there are too many different circumstances where most of us feel that decisions should be left to the people who are involved rather than having a totally legal prohibition. On the other hand, most people think in most circumstances that abortion is wrong and that it should not be done. So the abortion rate is going down in America. It is still very much too high, and we have tried to do some things to make adoption more attractive. And there was a law signed last year, that is gotten almost no notice because it was part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, to try to remove the prohibitions or the discriminations in courts across the country in cross-racial adoptions to try to do whatever we could to just encourage more adoptions. But let me back up to your question and to explain, if I might, why I do not agree that our position would cause more abortions. There is the Contract approach which is deny benefits to the second welfare child born out of wedlock. And then this extreme version is deny benefits to any teenager who has a child out of wedlock and to that child for up to 18 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3056, "text": "That is what then there is the people who say, turn it over to the States and let them do whatever they want, which could include that. Our position is give the States a lot more flexibility, but do not punish the children; take care of their basic needs. And we say do not cut the parents off of public assistance unless, number one, they are bad parents or, number two, they do things which will undermine their ability to either be successful workers or successful parents. So for example, the way our plan works is if you are a teenager and you have a baby, in order to draw the public assistance in a normal way you'd have to stay in school, you'd have to live at home with your parents, and if you lived in a bad home you'd have to live in some other supervised setting. You'd have to cooperate and help identify the father so we could attempt to get the father to pay child support and support the child. If at the end of your education period and training, if 2 years have elapsed and you have not gone to work, then you would have to go to work if there were a job available. And if you turned down a job, you could lose your benefits. Under their proposal, the second problem is, you'd be cut off after 2 years whether there is a job there or not. So the two differences are, I say cut people off after a limited amount of time if there is a job there. They say cut them off altogether. I say only take benefits away from people if they misbehave as parents or in their own responsibilities. They say if you have a child out of wedlock and you are a teenager, you should never get benefits and neither should your child. I will leave it to you to conclude what impact that might have on the abortion rate; I do not know. You have to have more requirements on people; you cannot just continue to perpetuate the present system. But I do not think you should punish the children or punish people for their past mistakes. You should deal with their present conduct. What about the suggestion that, particularly of Speaker Gingrich, that the churches and the charities should be able to take over much of the responsibility, including the financial responsibility that the Government now has for foster children and various other tough social situations? Is that an appropriate way for these problems to be taken care of, for these people to be cared for?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3057, "text": "Well, I think the churches could well be involved in more activities. For example, I think that you might and one of the things that I want to do is to give more flexibility in how to implement welfare reform to State and local government. If they want to involve the church, particularly, for example, in developing supervised settings for young girls and their children who cannot , and should not , be living in their homes because of the problems in their homes, that is the sort of partnership that I would certainly not oppose. But I do not think you can say from that that there is no national interest which should command some taxpayer support to make sure that these children have minimal levels of nutrition and medical care and just the basic things that it seems to me we have got an interest in doing, because we do not want to lose any more of these kids than we have to. The welfare benefits themselves, by the way, are not a problem. So nobody goes on welfare for the check. It is the child care; it is the food stamps; it is the medical care for your children. Therefore, nearly anybody who can will get off and go to work if they can take care of their children and their children will not lose their health care. But do I think the churches should do more? And one of the things that we want to do is to give more operational control of this program to the States and let them use churches or community organizations or others to do whatever they can to repair the families. Much of what the churches already do for instance, Catholic Charities, their money comes from contracts through Federal agencies. In essence, what some of the Republican proposals are asking them to do is to continue doing the sort of work but without those contracts, without the money. Well, it will just be harder for them, will not it? The Government does not we are not a particularly generous country in terms of social welfare. The thing I do not think the American people object to spending tax money on poor people. I think what they object to is spending tax money on a system that perpetuates destructive conduct and irresponsible conduct. I think that the issue is for example, I do not think most Americans really think that it would be a great idea to cut out all spending on poor children in order to afford a capital gains tax cut. On the other hand, would they rather have a tax cut or just waste money on any program, including a program that perpetuated dependency?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3058, "text": "I think they would or reduce the deficit or whatever. So I think the what my goal is, is to say there is a national interest in the health and welfare of our children. I think it requires some investment of taxpayer money in the areas of particularly basic health care and nutrition and immunization of children against serious diseases. So I think we ought to try to fix them. In a meeting of Baptist leaders back in October you were asked a question about some of your critics who were attacking you with unsubstantiated charges. I am thinking specifically of Reverend Falwell pushing a video on his TV program. And your response to the question was that you were busy running the country and did not want to respond to your critics, but you were surprised that the Christian community was not taking these men on. Since that time, I know American Baptist Tony Campollo was asked for equal time on his show to try to defend you.  There have been an awful lot of attempts I think there have been a lot of press stories refuting some of the specific allegations. But I would just say again, in the world we are living in I will say what I said at the prayer breakfast today there is an inordinate premium put on the use of words to destroy or to distract people. And it takes away from my ability to be ENTITY, to do the job with a clear head and a clear heart and to focus on the American people, if I have to spend all my time trying to answer charges about what people say that I did years ago. And I just cannot do it; I just cannot do it. I do the very best I can. Sometimes you can actually disprove something someone says about you. A lot of times, some people could lie about you in ways that you cannot disprove. You cannot always disprove every assertion. I think it is I think I have if I'd done anything, even though I have tried not to deal with it at all, I think whatever time I have spent kind of trying to absorb those blows since I have been ENTITY has been time and effort and energy, emotional as well as intellectual energy, has taken away from the American people. And I am not going to cheat them anymore; I am just not going to do it. I am tired of letting other people say things that require me to deprive the American people of the best effort I can make. They will have to make whatever evaluation of this they want to.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3059, "text": "There is a difference between reputation and character, and I have increasingly less control over my reputation but still full control over my character. That is between me and God, and I have just got to try to be purified by this. I also noticed, Winston Churchill said I ran across this the other day that just because someone strays from the truth in criticizing you does not mean you cannot learn something from their criticism. So I have decided that I will try need to learn a little something from my critics, even if what they say is not so. None of us are perfect, and I am certainly not. But I just cannot I really think I made the right decision to try to just tune it out and go forward. Is there a place in the Scriptures where you find a source for the kind of faith you talked about earlier and stillness in facing these things, a story or a parable or a reading that you have turned to? Well, it is interesting, I just finished reading the entire Psalms. I also read this is ironic Lloyd Ogilvie's book on the Psalms that I did not I read it before he was selected to be Chaplain of the Senate. And there are a lot of the Psalms where David is sort of praying for the strength to be sort of purified in the face of adversity and in the face of his own failures. There are a lot of the Proverbs which talk about the importance of keeping a quiet tongue and at least not getting in your own way, which I have done a lot in my life and which I have tried, even still, to grow out of. And I have spent a lot of time dealing with that over the last 2 years, as you would imagine I would have to. I think the important thing, and I find this in the Scriptures over and over again, the important thing that I have to keep focusing on is what am I going to do today, what am I going to do tomorrow, how can I be free to call on the power of God to make the most of this job that I have for a little bit of time in the grand sweep of things. And that is just what I keep focusing on every day. But I think you'd be amazed how many people write me little fax notes, from friends of mine on a daily basis, saying look at this Scripture, look at that Scripture, look at the other Scripture.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3060, "text": "During this difficult period, a lot of people were giving me different Psalms to read Sir, when you talk about destructive language, if you you refer to personal attacks on yourself. But what about some of the uncivil language which has been so much in the news over the past months that has been in Congress? Are you including that in I said today at the prayer breakfast, I do not think anybody in public life, including me, is blameless. I think it is that there are general excuse me, genuine differences that people have on issues, and they ought to express them. But our public life needs more of the spirit of reconciliation, it needs more civility, it needs more humility. Sometimes we think we know things we do not . And I think on debates over public issues, that is true as well. The American people very much want us to they respond to these negative things, but they do not like it. The reason it keeps happening is because they respond to it. The politicians read polls, you know, and they know very often that the negative campaigns work and elect people. And they know that if you just constantly demean and run down people, like, after a while it sticks. They know that, so they keep on doing it. And the people respond to it, but they hate it. It is almost saying, I wish you'd lock this liquor store up so I could not drink anymore. And so somehow we have to crawl back off of this wedge because it has, as I said, it is today people get more information that is sort of argumentative and editorial and often less accurate, and then get in a more negative context than ever before. And it is a function of the information explosion. And so I do believe that I and others have a heavier responsibility even than we might have had in a former time, when in order to just get people's attention, you might take a little license with your language, you know. proven through the words and your actions that you are a genuinely religious person, since you were very young, and your wife as well. And a lot of religious people I talk to do not seem to accept that, who do not seem to feel it is genuine, feel that you are using it in the course of making politics.  I mean, I think the First Amendment is a good thing for our country, that we protect the right of everybody to be faithful to whatever they believe by not uniting church and state.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3061, "text": "But I do not think you can change people or who they are. They have the convictions they have. They have the beliefs they have. And what I have tried to do is to draw the proper balance by encouraging people of all faiths, including people who disagree with me, to be activist citizens. I think the the book that Stephen Carter wrote on that, he makes a better statement about that than I can make, in terms of why they do not accept that about me. I think it is hard to make a case that I have tried to use this. I have never tried to say that for example, I never tried to say that there was a Christian coalition behind anything I did, you know, that God had ordained us to do these following things and I knew it, and anybody that did not was seized by the Devil. I never said that. I have said that like every other person, I consider myself a sinner because I believe I consider myself forgiven. I consider you know, I need the power of God. This is a humble thing for me. But it is an important part of my life and has been for a long time, but especially again in recent years and before I became ENTITY. And the same thing is true for Hillary. I think the truth is that there are people who do not believe it is genuine because they disagree with me politically. They do not believe that you could be a committed Christian and not want to criminalize all abortions. I just do not believe you can be that is what they think. They do not believe that you could be a committed Christian and believe that take the position that I took on gays in the military. They thought think the Bible dictated the previous policy on gays in the military, even though we fought two World Wars, Korea, and Vietnam with a different policy. But they do not believe that. So then I think there are people, once they disagree with you so much, who will believe who will believe in perpetuating anything anybody says about you, and so they think that is evidence of that. But you know, the Bible is full of refutations of the latter point. All they had to do was read the Scripture to know better than to make that argument. But I cannot worry about them; that is their problem. Let them think what they want.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3062, "text": "I literally you know, the one thing I realize is, is I wasted too much time when I got here, and it caused me to be a less effective ENTITY, either being hurt by or paying a great deal of attention to what people said about me in the past. And I have just got to try to keep going and fight against it, because the people that wanted to really blow that up either wanted to do it for their own purposes or wanted to do it literally without regard to whether the Government of the United States functions or the public interest is furthered. It is just a crazy way to behave; you cannot do it. It never happened before in our history to this extent, and it should not be happening now. And if it is happening, I cannot control it. So what I should do is just do my job and shut it out; that is what I have to do. Sir, do you think that religious groups such as the Christian Coalition risk their credibility by wholesale endorsement of the Contract With America? Well, I think that is for others to judge, I think, but I would say this. You know, I think that they will come to be seen more and more like a political party with an agenda, rather than people who are driven into politics based on one or two issues that they believe the Bible dictates a position different from the present policy of the United States. Nobody considers him to be, how should I say, sacrilegious because he is part of a party called the Christian Democratic Party that has religious roots, but no one anymore seriously believes that every position they take is rooted in their reading of the Scripture. And I think that the Christian Coalition is long since at that point. Now, the thing I do think they have to be careful about with their credibility is the very, very hard hits they put on office holders who do not do as they believe. I remember one of the Members of Congress who lost in the last election told me of an encounter with a Christian Coalition minister who said to this Member, Well, you want to see what we are going to put out in our churches on Sunday, tomorrow? And she said, Yes, I'd like to see it. And she went to these ten items; she said, But these two things are not true.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreligiousaffairsjournalists", "title": "Interview With Religious Affairs Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-religious-affairs-journalists", "publication_date": "02-02-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3063, "text": "We are very grateful you'd take the time. ENTITY, the figure of $92 billion is an unfathomable figure. It is almost imperceivable to us. We do know that to satisfy the deficit, to meet that deficit, the government's going to have to borrow. That is going to necessarily take away some borrowing availability of the newlywed looking for money to borrow for a home, for an automobile. You have asked the people to tough it out, to be patient on this kind of thing. And I realize I have reduced this to a simplistic term, but can you regard the question in that light, ENTITY? because this is not new, what has been happening to us. This has been the result of policies that were deliberately instituted sometime ago with a belief that they could control inflation. And we have just begun to apply the medicine. But Mr. Stockman has said that it'll be at least 1987 or through 1987 before the budget can be balanced. But at the same time there is this difference that with our tax cuts and the increase in savings, which has already begun, you know it does not take much more than a 1- or 2-percent increase in savings to add billions and billions of dollars to the capital pool. The person that either buys an insurance policy or puts the money in a bank, in a savings account that money is subsequently loaned, then, by the banks or the insurance companies, invested in industry, in growth, in mortgages, and so forth. And so, you have a pool of money that can probably handle the government borrowing as well as the rest. Those people who were advocating a tax increase as a method of trying to hold down the deficit and remember, it never has-in all the years past we have had nothing but tax increases and the deficits, and the deficits grew bigger. What is the difference whether the government has to borrow the money from the people and take it out of private circulation, or take it out of circulation by taxes? Either way, the people are without the money. Are you counting, ENTITY, on the people to use that 10 percent to put into IRA's and other protective securities, and not spend the money? We already some will spend it. There will be people who have long unmet needs. But we know also and much earlier than we thought remember that and the present recession might have been mitigated greatly had we gotten what we originally asked for.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlocalreportersbloomingtonminnesotabudgetissuesandthefederalism", "title": "Interview With Local Reporters in Bloomington, Minnesota, on Budget Issues and the Federalism Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-local-reporters-bloomington-minnesota-budget-issues-and-the-federalism", "publication_date": "08-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3064, "text": "We wanted a 10-percent cut in the income tax, retroactive to a year ago January. We finally to compromise, to get the bill at all, we finally had to cut to 5 percent instead of 10 in the first year. And then we retreated to July instead of the last January, and finally to October 1st. So, for 1941 our tax cut has only amounted to 1 1/4 percent. And yet even with that, and even with only these 4 months now since October, there is an increase in the rate of savings, and we have been probably the lowest rate of almost all of the industrial countries in that. ENTITY, a question about the current budget as it relates to your new federalism. And last year there was a safety net, programs that would protect the truly needy, and now more cuts or savings. Obviously, last year's safety net is different from this year's safety net. Where is that safety net now, and ultimately, in your new federalism plan, will it be the province of the States to establish that safety net? No, the Federal Government, I think, will be responsible for the standards, the basic standards. But the federalism program, which would be phased in over an 8-year period and this is one of the reasons I am out in the country right now we proposed a conceptual framework. That has to be fleshed out with specifics as to how it is going to operate. We are consulting with mayors, with Governors, with State legislators, with county executives all over the country for their help. Do you like it? And we are getting their input as to how we can phase these more than 40 programs over to State and local control a mandatory pass-through of those programs where the money should go on through to local governments, not just to the State level. And we believe that the savings will be tremendous, because trying to run these programs from the Federal level and the Federal Government is never equipped to do that; the Constitution even provides against it the Federal Government has tried to make rules and regulations that will fit Wyoming and Montana and Los Angeles and New York City, not recognizing the great diversity of this country. They also-and I say this as a Governor who for 8 years was implementing programs under the Federal regulations they with their red tape and with their regulations they impose extravagance on you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlocalreportersbloomingtonminnesotabudgetissuesandthefederalism", "title": "Interview With Local Reporters in Bloomington, Minnesota, on Budget Issues and the Federalism Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-local-reporters-bloomington-minnesota-budget-issues-and-the-federalism", "publication_date": "08-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3065, "text": "They so dictate the spending of every dollar that you have no leeway to say, Well, this is a higher priority in this area, in this other program. We should be doing more of this and less of this. You had no right to do that. You had to spend the money the way they told you to spend it. ENTITY --last year, and now with the additional cuts in your present budget, the safety net this year is something different than what it was last year. And last year we promised that there had to be some $70 billion more in cuts over the next couple of years, and this is one of the couple of years coming up '83. No, we are going to take care of the people who really must be helped and who have real need. What we are trying to do is give those who are administering the programs the freedom to get rid of programs that do not work or at the same time get rid of people who actually under the technical rules may be eligible but who do not have the need that justifies their being there. ENTITY, maybe I revert to my original question. How long would you expect the unemployed schoolteacher, of whom there will be about 8,000 in Minnesota, how long would you expect them to wait? Well, unfortunately and as one who lived through of the Great Depression, in fact entered the work force at the depths of the Great Depression as I did, there is no one who feels more deeply than I do about the tragedy of unemployment. But I also, I hate to say this, with them listening, if you look back over the recessions, that the policies that we have known for the last few decades have brought us the '70 depression , the 1974 depression , and the one that we had that began in '79, this one. But I believe that under our program we are going to begin to see an economic turn along about the late spring or early summer. ENTITY, how would you expect industry to absorb these and I am talking about the unemployed middle class; I am talking about the white-collar worker, the professional careers, the schoolteacher-how would you expect industry to absorb that great number? Well, for one reason, we are only operating at about 70 percent of capacity now. When our economy expands to full production, a great many of our unemployed are people who have been laid off now plants that are standing there idle.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlocalreportersbloomingtonminnesotabudgetissuesandthefederalism", "title": "Interview With Local Reporters in Bloomington, Minnesota, on Budget Issues and the Federalism Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-local-reporters-bloomington-minnesota-budget-issues-and-the-federalism", "publication_date": "08-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3066, "text": "ENTITY, how is the economy going to expand when the interest rates go up and companies do not expand to take on these people? When would you expect to see the first signs of recovery, the first hint? Well, I think we have seen a few indicators right now. Not in unemployment, because I believe that is even going to get worse for a little while. But I would say that along about midyear and along about the spring, early summer, we are going to see a turn and an upward turn in the economy. Even though the budget has been projected into 1987 by Mr. Stockman, the deficit, that is, would not begin to show a recovery, the budget itself. Because Mr. Stockman and I and all the others in the administration, by law, are forced to project deficits out 5 years in advance. I will tell you now I do not believe anyone can. I do not believe in those. There are so many imponderables that we have complied with the law, but I will tell you that I did it knowing we do not know what we are talking about, nor does anyone else who tells you they are projecting deficits 5 years in advance. ENTITY, let us go back to your new federalism plan and how it is going to affect the States. As you obviously are aware, Minnesota is one of those States which does not enjoy a good financial picture right now. The legislature has recently patched up a 700-million-plus deficit. With the shift of government programs to the States, even with the trust fund, which you mentioned, it is going to have a strong and a heavy impact on States like Minnesota and the other north. We are going to transfer the funds that are necessary to perform the programs. And the trade that we proposed, of the Federal Government taking Medicaid and in return them taking food stamps and the Aid to Dependent Children, was because the increase, annual increase in spending on Medicaid is several times greater than the increase in those other programs. So, the Federal Government, by taking that program on, is going to relieve the States of an increased burden that will begin to be reflected in them having more of their own tax revenues as well as what we give them than they would have had, had they continued participating in Medicaid. Some members of your party do not agree with those numbers, thinking that the 28 really may not be enough.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlocalreportersbloomingtonminnesotabudgetissuesandthefederalism", "title": "Interview With Local Reporters in Bloomington, Minnesota, on Budget Issues and the Federalism Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-local-reporters-bloomington-minnesota-budget-issues-and-the-federalism", "publication_date": "08-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3067, "text": "I want to talk to you about guns, gun legislation. But the day's news is on Elian Gonzalez. How soon can he expect to see the child? And the Justice Department is working on that, and I think in a way we are fortunate to have an Attorney General who understands this issue, because Janet Reno was the prosecutor in Dade County for many years. And they are working on it. I do not know, I cannot answer with any specifics. But I have confidence that they will do the best they can to handle it in an expeditious and sensitive way. ENTITY, from almost all other citizens, if the Immigration Service rules, and a Federal judge backs the ruling, then people will obey the law. Well, I think the people-you can ask them; they can speak for themselves better than I do. But they, I think they feel that they are not sure that the process was adequate since it occurred in Cuba. And you know, some of the people there are just against anybody going back to Cuba. But I think there are a lot of people who have genuine questions about it. And I think the fact that the father has come here and will be in a position to show his concern for and desire to be reunited with his son should be a big help. And as I said, I think the Justice Department will do a good job here, and I think Attorney General Reno really understands what is going on. And I think we will work through it. You have consistently said that the father speaks for the son. You stand by that? Well, that is the decision that was made by the INS. They went down and interviewed the father extensively. And they concluded that based on his previous contacts, which were regular, with his son, that he was a fit representative to speak for his son. And under our law, since Elian Gonzalez is a very young child, someone must be the designated person to speak for him. And under our law, the parent, as long as he is a fit parent, is that person. So the INS made the decision that they felt was appropriate, and the judge ruled that they had the authority to make it. And now the family members in Miami are appealing to the Court of Appeals and arguing that there ought to be a more extensive inquiry into his best interests. But I think that the main thing is that the Justice Department is handling it and that in the end the law ought to prevail.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3068, "text": "And I do not think that the young man's best interests are served by the rest of us talking about it too much. I think the Justice Department is going to try to work through this, and I have confidence that Janet Reno will handle it in a good way. I respect what you say about perhaps we should not discuss it too much. But the mayor of Miami-I have in mind you saying, well, the law takes care of this. But the mayor of Miami has said that if anything bad happens, he will hold you and Janet Reno directly responsible, and-I think I quote him, at least indirectly, correctly-do not expect any help from him or the city of Miami in enforcing the law. Did that surprise you? But I think there is been some indication since then that he and others want to get this back in a lawful process. And I think the mayor of Miami is a fine young leader with an enormous amount of potential. But he represents the Cuban-American community. He is part of it. They have-I think that it is fair to say they have a big presumption against anything that happens in Cuba, including an INS proceeding. But I think that in the end, the rule of law will prevail in this country. The overwhelming majority of Cuban-Americans are law-abiding good citizens. They have made a great contribution to our country. And I think in the end, the rule of law will prevail. And I think we ought to have-just take a deep breath here and realize this is a highly unusual case, and let the Attorney General work through it. I believe she will do a good job on this. ENTITY, you have consistently said that we should not politicize the case of this 6-year-old boy. But your Vice President has broken with your administration's position, a clearly political move. One, were you surprised by that? And two, are you irritated or angry about it? Well, first of all, I do not know that it was clearly political, in the sense that there was a bill introduced in the Congress to deal with what the people in Miami say is the main defect in the INS proceeding. If you notice, they have not attacked the father. Their claim is that even if he is a fit father, that it is not in Elian Gonzalez's best interests to be returned, at least at this moment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3069, "text": "So they say, if the INS followed the law, then the law ought to be changed so that a determination of his best interests can be made. Now, once the bill was introduced-there are a lot of reasons I do not agree with the bill. I do not support the bill. But once the bill was introduced, I think every public figure in America, national figure, was going to have to take a position on it. And as a matter of fact, I do not believe it was a purely political position. I know the conventional wisdom is that the Vice President's position was purely political, but he talked to me-I do not know, a day or two after Elian Gonzalez's case became public, weeks and weeks and weeks ago, and said, You know, I am very worried about this process. I am afraid we are going to have a lot of problems with this process. So you know, he personally and privately said that to me long before this bill was introduced and long before it became a matter of big public debate. And because of that and, I think, because he is himself a candidate now, I think he had to take a position and say what he thought. Respectfully, ENTITY, a member of the Vice President's staff has been quoted as saying that it was a political decision. And too, he went on to say, the Vice President is not going to fall on his sword for you. That would lead a reasonable person to believe that it was a political decision. You know, if I knew who said that and they were quoted by name, I would have more regard for the quote. I do not think he should fall on his sword for me. He is out there now making his own case to the American people. All I can tell you is, I will bet you that staff member did not know that I talked to Al Gore shortly after this case became public, and he said to me privately that he was disturbed about the process and whether it could adequately account for this young man's best interests. That is what he told me a long time ago, purely privately, and long before he ever said anything publicly about it. I want to move on to the subject of guns, but before we-just as we leave this-- He might have meant, you know, that falling on your sword sometimes means that you have to agree with the President, whether you really agree with the President or not.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3070, "text": "That is what Vice Presidents do when they are not independent candidates. And since I do not think he agrees with me, and since he is a candidate, I do not think he should mask an honest disagreement. And it is one that I believe that he actually believes, based on a private conversation I had long before he ever made a public statement. So you do not have any problem with it? Let us talk about guns. Next week, is it fair to say you are dedicating the week to doing what you can to get increased, at least, handgun control? You are going to Maryland to be seen with the Governor as he signs a new handgun control law into law. Then you are going to Colorado, where there is a State ballot initiative that you are backing, and this initiative contains many of the provisions that you seek in Federal law. Question, why no focus on getting new State laws passed, rather than press forward with Federal legislation? And because if you have Federal laws, they can be more efficiently administered. I think gun control is still sort of an explosive term to the American people, because they think we are going to take somebody's guns away from them. And the truth is, all we have tried to do is to take preventive measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. And I think that on the specific measures, I think the overwhelming majority of the American people support us. And Colorado, which is a predominately Republican State, I believe this initiative will pass because they have had experience with it. And I think that it is unconscionable for Congress to hide behind the fact that there are States taking action. Maryland required child trigger locks this week, for example, and required safety training courses and things of that kind for handgun purchases. The State of Massachusetts applied its consumer protection laws to handguns, and Colorado has got this initiative to close the gun show loophole, which I think is very important. But it will take forever and a day for all the States to do that, and the Federal Government ought to do it. You know, it is simply an extension of what we did with the Brady bill. We had all this hoopla when I signed the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban about how damaging it was to the rights of gun owners, the legitimate hunters and sports people. Not a single hunter has missed a day in the deer woods; not a single sports person has missed a sport shooting contest.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3071, "text": "Nobody has been burdened by this, and a half-million felons, fugitives, and stalkers have not gotten handguns as a result. Gun crime is at a 30-year low in America, not just because we have increased gun prosecutions, which we have, but because we have done more prevention. That is what this is about. You are in a fierce fight on Capitol Hill to get Federal additional gun safety legislation passed. And you set April 20th, the anniversary of the Columbine, Colorado, high school shootings as the goal. Is there any chance that it would get passed by that time? We have a majority for it in both Houses, I think. But the Republican leadership in the Senate may be able to keep it from coming to a vote. They cannot really keep things from coming to a vote in the House, so I think there is a majority for closing the gun show loophole, a majority for banning the importation of large scale ammunition clips. Who could be against that? We have got an assault weapons ban in the country, and then we turn around and make a mockery of it by letting people import these big ammunition clips which they can put on the guns and convert them into assault weapons. Most manufacturers do it anyway. But I think we are making progress. I think the action in these States indicates it; the initiative in Colorado, with the support of many Republican officials in Colorado; the incredibly brave action that Smith & Wesson has taken to try to improve the way it markets and distributes guns and the way those handguns are sold. I hope they will find some resonance among other gun manufacturers. So we are making progress. The interest behind it, the status quo, are very strong. Do you suppose, if I may-I do not mean to interrupt-you say the interest behind this is very strong. As Butch Cassidy said to the Sundance Kid, Who are these guys? Well, the NRA and other groups even to the right of them, and a lot of people in the Congress, in the Republican Party, really agree with them. A handful of Democrats do. And again I say, if they had any evidence that we had undermined hunting or undermined sport shooting or even undermined legitimate self-defense, it would be one thing. The only evidence they have is we have kept handguns out of the hands of half million felons, fugitives, and stalkers.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3072, "text": "And the last place, besides person-to-person transactions, that such people can get handguns with impunity is at these gun shows. So we ought to close the gun show loophole and do a background check. There are some minor details of adjustment that would have to be undertaken to do these background checks, to make it work when you do these one-day shows out in rural areas. But they can easily be taken care of, and we ought to do it. You mentioned the Republican leadership in the House and the Senate. What I and other reporters talk to them, they say, basically, Look, the President could get a lot of what he wants. He could get the trigger locks for children on handguns. He could get the ban on importing the extra long clips-if the President would simply compromise on the criminal background checks for gun shows. Well, first of all, we already offered a compromise. John Conyers has offered a compromise to Representative Henry Hyde that we were hoping could prevail in the conference. You know, the bill is in conference now. We got a good bill out of the Senate on this gun show loophole because the Vice President broke the tie. The bill is in conference, and Mr. Conyers offered a compromise. Let me say, if you look at the gun shows, they want insta-check. When you do these background checks-let us just look at the facts-when you do the background checks, you can get over 70 percent of the background checks done in the first hour. You can get 95 percent of them done-or over 90 percent in the first day. So they say, Well, just agree to a 24-hour background check or an insta-check system. The real difficulty is, of the roughly 10 percent you cannot finish in one day, the rejection rate in that 10 percent is 20 times higher than the rejection rate in the 90 percent. So what we tried to do was to work out an agreement where we let everybody who would be cleared, be cleared, but we did not have an automatic release for the others, because they are 20 times more likely to have background problems which would not enable them to purchase these guns. So I think it is an almost bizarre development, since we are more than willing to meet them halfway.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3073, "text": "We have offered them a good compromise-that they would hold this whole bill up to protect that 10 percent when they know that is where a huge percentage of the problem gun-buyers are, people that are likely to use those guns for criminal conduct. So we have offered a compromise. John Conyers offered a good compromise to Representative Henry Hyde, and I hope and pray that they will take it or something like it. I am willing to compromise, but I do not think that we ought to gut the main purposes of the background check. And again, you know, they say, Well, we have these shows out in the country. They occur on the weekend. They are not all basically at big-city convention centers. But the gun could be deposited with the local sheriff's office for the weekend while the background check is completed, for example. You could deposit the gun and the check and return one or the other or both. It would be easy to work through this if they really wanted to. I just think it is important-I think the child trigger locks are important because the accidental death rate in America of the children are so high, 9 times higher than the next 25 biggest countries combined. But we ought to close the loophole in the Brady law. I am willing to compromise, but I do not want to destroy the purposes of the background check. Our correspondent Maureen Maher has been doing some investigation of some of the loopholes in the Brady law, which turn out to be pretty extensive. If you could close one loophole in the Brady law, what would it be? There are some other loopholes in the Brady law, but if you look at the numbers, it is been quite successful. For all of its problems, it is been quite successful. And when you do the insta-check, you know, we have to do instant checks whenever we can-when you do the insta-check, you actually-you lose some people, because if you cannot wait 3 days, there are some records that have not been logged in, for example, that will not be picked up on the insta-check. But when we passed the Brady bill, that is the best we could do. We had to take a bill that would say a 3-day waiting period, but insta-check whenever possible when it became possible. And so we are stuck with that for the time being. I have a totally different view of this than the people on the other side of the issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3074, "text": "I think I have demonstrated in 7 years here I have never tried to take a gun away from a lawabiding citizen. I have never tried to interfere with hunting or sport shooting. But I believe that guns are like every other area of national life where there is a lot of loss of life and injury. Prevention is always the first line of defense. Punish people that violate the law; throw the book at them; but in this area alone, let us do not have much prevention, because we are worried about the second amendment or a slippery slope or whatever. I think that we can save so many more lives by sensible prevention and not interfere with legitimate gun owners. ENTITY, did you ever own a gun? I have owned a shotgun. I had a .22 when I was little kid. I had a couple of handguns when I was a Governor. I suppose I was 12 the first time I had target practice, you know, shooting cans off fenceposts. And I normally went hunting, duck hunting, once a year when I was Governor. On occasion, I went bird hunting. I have been duck hunting a couple of times since I have been President. Let me follow up on this Smith & Wesson deal. A number of people, none of whom want their name attached to it, say, ENTITY, you have to look into this deal, because, one, Smith & Wesson was about to go bankrupt, and so this was a form of what they call financial blackmail. Not that I know of. I do not know that-if it is true, I do not know it. Any agreement that you know of, the Federal Government has agreed to supply Federal law enforcement officers with Smith & Wesson weapons? No, that was not a part of the agreement. Since then, we have looked into the question of whether we-as have many local jurisdictions looked into the question-whether they can give any kind of preference or consideration to Smith & Wesson in their purchases because they have taken this action. But obviously, whatever they do will have to take account of the need to get the best possible weapons for their law enforcement officials. And we are looking into-I wanted to look into to see what, if anything, we can do as well. But I know that a lot of cities were so appreciative of what Smith & Wesson did. This is like the Brady bill gun show loophole.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3075, "text": "The main thing Smith & Wesson did in changing its marketing and distribution policies was to focus on a fact that I would think that the NRA would want us to focus on, and that is that an inordinately high percentage of guns used in crimes are sold through a very small percentage of the gun sellers. So the main thing, when you strip away everything else Smith & Wesson did, what they are really trying to do is to stop providing weapons to people who obviously are careless in enforcing the Brady bill or have a criminal clientele or otherwise just are not taking care of their business. I would have thought when Smith & Wesson came forward, since this had nothing to do with the Brady bill or anything else-this was about having gun dealers clean up their act and gun manufacturers putting the hammer on them to do it, rewarding those that are good, punishing those that are not . I would have thought that is the kind of thing the NRA would like. I was actually kind of surprised that they and the gun dealers went so totally the other way about this, because you cannot get out of the fact-we now have evidence-a very small percentage of gun dealers sell a very high percentage of the guns used in serious crimes. That is what we are trying to get at. ENTITY, I have all kinds of things I'd like to ask you about, including China and the World Trade Organization, but the clock is running on us. Let me ask you two questions, and I will let you get on to your next meeting. You recently said at a meeting that the First Lady, in her bid for a Senate seat in New York, faces-I think this is your direct quote- a right-wing venom machine that is collecting double tons of money to defeat her. Was that too strong, on reflection? Well, it depends on how you interpret the facts. Richard Viguerie is doing Mayor Giuliani's mail. Mayor Giuliani, when he was mayor of New York, basically said, I am not a Reagan Republican anymore. I am for the Brady bill. I am for the assault weapons ban. I am for the President's crime program. We had a good relationship. Now he is got Richard Viguerie doing this venomous mailing, talking about what a left-wing crazy my wife is, when-while he was mayor of New York, he was in agreement with her and me on most issues. While he was helping the mayor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3076, "text": "But the Viguerie mailings, which are being sent to people who have fought me the whole time I am here-which is fine-are basically using the same old standard hard-core right-wing stuff, the kind of stuff we saw Governor Bush do to Senator McCain in South Carolina, that kind of-sort of that kind of thing. And I think if he is going to do it and get the benefit of it, he can raise a lot of money, because a lot of us folks see beating Hillary or beating the Vice President as another way of going after us for what we have tried to do here on issues like gun safety and vetoing the big tax cuts to keep a balanced budget and the surplus and other things we have fought for. They see that as a way of continuing the battle. He can raise a lot of money that way, but I do not think he should be able to raise it for free. That is, I think he ought to have to be accountable for the rhetoric being used in his behalf and the money that is coming in as a result of that kind of inflammatory right-wing rhetoric. Would you be surprised if I told you that tonight's CBS poll indicates the First Lady is up by 8 points now in the race with Giuliani? She knows what she wants to do for New York. I am really proud of her, and I just-I think these polls will change a lot between now and November. You do not think that what one newspaper has called the wealthy hate Hillary campaign will, in the end, sink her? I think the main thing that she is got to think about is not what they are saying about her but what she is going to say to the people of New York. I think a lot of that is-when you have opposition in politics, a lot of times what they are trying to do is distract you from doing your main job, which is to communicate with the people and to serve the people. And I think if she will just focus on that, talk about her life, her work, and what she wants to do, I think she will do fine. ENTITY, I am getting the cut signal. I so much appreciate you taking the time to do this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews0", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3077, "text": "You have argued that ISIS has been on the defensive. Are we actually losing this war, or would you not go that far? No, I do not think we are losing, and I just talked to our CENTCOM commanders and the folks on the ground. There is no doubt there was a tactical setback, although Ramadi had been vulnerable for a very long time, primarily because these are not Iraqi security forces that we have trained or reinforced. They have been there essentially for a year without sufficient reinforcements, and the number of ISIL that have come into the city now are relatively small compared to what happened in Mosul. But it is indicative that the training of Iraqi security forces, the fortifications, the command-and-control systems are not happening fast enough in Anbar, in the Sunni parts of the country. You have seen actually significant progress in the north, and those areas where the Peshmerga are participating. Those predominantly Shia areas, you are not seeing any forward momentum by ISIL, and ISIL has been significantly degraded across the country. You have got to worry about the Iraqi forces I am getting to that, ENTITY. You asked me a question, and there is no doubt that in the Sunni areas, we are going to have to ramp up not just training, but also commitment, and we better get Sunni tribes more activated than they currently have been. So it is a source of concern. We are eight months into what we have always anticipated to be a multi-year campaign, and I think Prime Minister Abadi recognizes many of these problems, but they are going to have to be addressed. There is this interesting conversation going on in Republican circles right now, debating a question that you answered for yourself 13 years ago, about whether it was right or wrong to go into Iraq. What is this conversation actually about? You are under virtually no pressure correct me if I am wrong but you are under virtually no pressure domestically to get more deeply involved in the Middle East. That seems to be one of the downstream consequences of the Iraq invasion 12 years ago. As you said, I am very clear on the lessons of Iraq. I think it was a mistake for us to go in in the first place, despite the incredible efforts that were made by our men and women in uniform. Despite that error, those sacrifices allowed the Iraqis to take back their country. That opportunity was squandered by Prime Minister Maliki and the unwillingness to reach out effectively to the Sunni and Kurdish populations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3078, "text": "But today the question is not whether or not we are sending in contingents of U.S. ground troops. How do we find effective partners to govern in those parts of Iraq that right now are ungovernable and effectively defeat ISIL, not just in Iraq but in Syria? It is important to have a clear idea of the past because we do not want to repeat mistakes. I know that there are some in Republican quarters who have suggested that I have overlearned the mistake of Iraq, and that, in fact, just because the 2003 invasion did not go well does not argue that we should not go back in. And one lesson that I think is important to draw from what happened is that if the Iraqis themselves are not willing or capable to arrive at the political accommodations necessary to govern, if they are not willing to fight for the security of their country, we cannot do that for them. I think Prime Minister Abadi is sincere and committed to an inclusive Iraqi state, and I will continue to order our military to provide the Iraqi security forces all assistance that they need in order to secure their country, and I will provide diplomatic and economic assistance that is necessary for them to stabilize. But we cannot do it for them, and one of the central flaws I think of the decision back in 2003 was the sense that if we simply went in and deposed a dictator, or simply went in and cleared out the bad guys, that somehow peace and prosperity would automatically emerge, and that lesson we should have learned a long time ago. How do we find effective partners not just in Iraq, but in Syria, and in Yemen, and in Libya that we can work with, and how do we create the international coalition and atmosphere in which people across sectarian lines are willing to compromise and are willing to work together in order to provide the next generation a fighting chance for a better future? Let me do two or three on Iran, and then we will move to Israel and Jews. By the way, you are coming to my synagogue to speak on Friday. I am very much looking forward to it. This is the biggest thing that is happened there since the last Goldberg bar mitzvah. So in 2012 you told me, when we were talking about Iran, It is almost certain that other players in the region would feel it necessary to get their own nuclear weapons if Iran got them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3079, "text": "Now we are in this kind of weird situation in which there is talk that Saudi Arabia, maybe Turkey, maybe Egypt would go build nuclear infrastructures come the finalization of this deal to match the infrastructure that your deal is going to leave in place in Iran. Have you asked the Saudis not to go down any kind of nuclear path? What have they told you about this? And what are the consequences if other countries in the region say, Well you know what, they have 5,000 centrifuges? We are going to have 5,000 centrifuges. Well, Prince Turki said it publicly Well, he is not in the government. There has been no indication from the Saudis or any other countries that they have an intention to pursue their own nuclear program. Part of the reason why they would not pursue their own nuclear program assuming that we have been successful in preventing Iran from continuing down the path of obtaining a nuclear weapon is that the protection that we provide as their partner is a far greater deterrent than they could ever hope to achieve by developing their own nuclear stockpile or trying to achieve breakout capacity when it comes to nuclear weapons, and they understand that. What we saw at the GCC summit was, I think, legitimate skepticism and concern, not simply about the Iranian nuclear program itself but also the consequences of sanctions coming down. We walked through the four pathways that would be shut off in any agreement that I would be signing off on. Technically, we showed them how it would be accomplished what the verification mechanisms will be, how the UN snapback provisions might work. They were satisfied that if in fact the agreement meant the benchmarks that we have set forth, that it would prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and given that, they understand that ultimately their own security and defense is much better served by working with us. Their covert presumably pursuit of a nuclear program would greatly strain the relationship they have got with the United States. I just want you to help me square something. So you have argued, quite eloquently in fact, that the Iranian regime has at its highest levels been infected by a kind of anti-Semitic worldview. You talked about that with Tom . Venomous anti-Semitism I think is the term that you used.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3080, "text": "You have argued not that it even needs arguing but you have argued that people who subscribe to an anti-Semitic worldview, who explain the world through the prism of anti-Semitic ideology, are not rational, are not built for success, are not grounded in a reality that you and I might understand. And yet, you have also argued that the regime in Tehran a regime you have described as anti-Semitic, among other problems that they have is practical, and is responsive to incentive, and shows signs of rationality. So I do not understand how these things fit together in your mind. Well the fact that you are anti-Semitic, or racist, does not preclude you from being interested in survival. It does not preclude you from being rational about the need to keep your economy afloat; it does not preclude you from making strategic decisions about how you stay in power; and so the fact that the supreme leader is anti-Semitic does not mean that this overrides all of his other considerations. You know, if you look at the history of anti-Semitism, ENTITY, there were a whole lot of European leaders and there were deep strains of anti-Semitism in this country  They may make irrational decisions with respect to discrimination, with respect to trying to use anti-Semitic rhetoric as an organizing tool. At the margins, where the costs are low, they may pursue policies based on hatred as opposed to self-interest. But the costs here are not low, and what we have been very clear to the Iranian regime over the past six years is that we will continue to ratchet up the costs, not simply for their anti-Semitism, but also for whatever expansionist ambitions they may have. That is what the sanctions represent. That is what the military option I have made clear I preserve represents. And so I think it is not at all contradictory to say that there are deep strains of anti-Semitism in the core regime, but that they also are interested in maintaining power, having some semblance of legitimacy inside their own country, which requires that they get themselves out of what is a deep economic rut that we have put them in, and on that basis they are then willing and prepared potentially to strike an agreement on their nuclear program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3081, "text": "One of the other issues that is troubling about this is and I am quoting Jack Lew here, who said a couple of weeks ago at the Washington Institute when talking about Iran's various nefarious activities, he said, Most of the money Iran receives from sanctions relief will not be used to support those activities. To me that sounds like a little bit of wishful thinking that is going to want to get paid, Hezbollah is going to see, among other groups, might see a little bit of a windfall from these billions of dollars that might pour in. I am not assuming something completely in the other direction either, but I just do not know where your confidence comes from. Well I do not think Jack or anybody in this administration said that no money will go to the military as a consequence of sanctions relief. The question is, if Iran has $150 billion parked outside the country, does the IRGC automatically get $150 billion? Does that $150 billion then translate by orders of magnitude into their capacity to project power throughout the region? And that is what we contest, because when you look at the math, first of all they are going to have to deliver on their obligations under any agreement, which would take a certain period of time. Then there are the mechanics of unwinding the existing restraints they have on getting that money, which takes a certain amount of time. Then Rouhani and, by extension, the supreme leader have made a series of commitments to improve the Iranian economy, and the expectations are outsized. You saw the reaction of people in the streets of Tehran after the signing of the agreement. You have Iranian elites who are champing at the bit to start moving business and getting out from under the restraints that they have been under. And what is also true is that the IRGC right now, precisely because of sanctions, in some ways are able to exploit existing restrictions to have a monopoly on what comes in and out of the country, and they have got their own revenue sources that they have been able to develop, some of which may actually lessen as a consequence of sanctions relief. So I do not think this is a science, and this is an issue that came up with the GCC countries during the summit. It is not a mathematical formula whereby get a certain amount of sanctions relief and automatically they are causing more problems in the neighborhood.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3082, "text": "What makes that particularly important is, in the discussion with the GCC countries, we pointed out that the biggest vulnerabilities that they have to Iran, and the most effective destabilizing activities of the IRGC and Quds Force are actually low-cost. They are not a threat to the region because of their hardware. They have a missile program. We have to think about missile-defense systems and how those are integrated and coordinated. But the big problems we have are weapons going in to Hezbollah, or them sending agents into Yemen, or other low-tech asymmetric threats that they are very effective at exploiting, which they are already doing they have been doing despite sanctions. They will continue to do unless we are developing greater capacity to prevent them from doing those things, which is part of what our discussion was in terms of the security assurances with the GCC countries. You know, if you look at a situation like Yemen, part of the problem is the chronic, endemic weakness in a state like that, and the instability that Iran then seeks to exploit. If you had GCC countries who were more capable of maritime interdiction, effective intelligence, cutting off financing sources, and are more effective in terms of working and training with allied forces in a place like Yemen, so that Houthis cannot just march into Sana'a, well, if all those things are being done, Iran having some additional dollars from sanctions relief is not going to override those improvements and capabilities, and that is really where we have to focus. Hezbollah has a certain number of fighters who are hardened and effective. If Iran has some additional resources, then perhaps they are less strained in trying to make payroll when it comes to Hezbollah, but it is not as if they can suddenly train up and successfully deploy 10 times the number of Hezbollah fighters that are currently in Syria. That is not something that they have automatic capacity to do.  You could buy more rockets and put them in south Lebanon. Well, and the issue though with respect to rockets in south Lebanon is not whether enough money to do so. They have shown a commitment to doing that even when their economy is in the tank. Are we able to interdict those shipments more effectively than we do right now? And that is the kind of thing that we have to continue to partner with Israel and other countries to stop. Let me go to these questions related to Israel and your relationship to the American Jewish community.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3083, "text": "So a number of years ago, I made the case that you are America's first Jewish president. the number of Jewish mentors you have had Abner Mikva, Newton Minow, and so on teachers, law professors, fellow community organizers, Jewish literature, Jewish thought, and of course your early political base in Chicago. There are obviously Jews in America who are immune to the charms of this argument, led by Sheldon Adelson but not only him. All the steps he is taken he meaning you against the State of Israel are liable to bring about the destruction of the state. I have my own theories about why there is this bifurcation in the American Jewish community, and we have discussed this in past interviews, but what is going on? Is this the byproduct of well-intentioned anxiety about Iran, about the explosive growth of anti-Semitism in Europe? Let me depersonalize it a little bit. I consistently received overwhelming majority support from the Jewish community, and even after all the publicity around the recent differences that I have had with Prime Minister Netanyahu, the majority of the Jewish American community still supports me, and supports me strongly. It was 70 percent in the last election. I think that there are a lot of crosscurrents that are going on right now. There is no doubt that the environment worldwide is scary for a lot of Jewish families. You have mentioned some of those trends. You have a Middle East that is turbulent and chaotic, and where extremists seem to be full of enthusiasm and momentum. You have Europe, where, as you have very effectively chronicled, there is an emergence of a more overt and dangerous anti-Semitism. And so part of the concern in the Jewish community is that, only a generation removed from the Holocaust, it seems that anti-Semitic rhetoric and anti-Israeli rhetoric is on the rise. What I also think is that there has been a very concerted effort on the part of some political forces to equate being pro-Israel, and hence being supportive of the Jewish people, with a rubber stamp on a particular set of policies coming out of the Israeli government. So if you are questioning settlement policy, that indicates you are anti-Israeli, or that indicates you are anti-Jewish. If you express compassion or empathy towards Palestinian youth, who are dealing with checkpoints or restrictions on their ability to travel, then you are suspect in terms of your support of Israel.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3084, "text": "If you are willing to get into public disagreements with the Israeli government, then the notion is that you are being anti-Israel, and by extension, anti-Jewish. I completely reject that. Is that a cynical ploy by somebody? Well I will not ascribe motives to them. I think that some of those folks may sincerely believe that the Jewish state is consistently embattled, that it is in a very bad neighborhood and either you are with them or against them, and end of story. And they may sincerely believe it. My response to them is that, precisely because I care so deeply about the State of Israel, precisely because I care so much about the Jewish people, I feel obliged to speak honestly and truthfully about what I think will be most likely to lead to long-term security, and will best position us to continue to combat anti-Semitism, and I make no apologies for that precisely because I am secure and confident about how deeply I care about Israel and the Jewish people. I think it would be a moral failing for me as president of the United States, and a moral failing for America, and a moral failing for the world, if we did not protect Israel and stand up for its right to exist, because that would negate not just the history of the 20th century, it would negate the history of the past millennium. And it would violate what we have learned, what humanity should have learned, over that past millennium, which is that when you show intolerance and when you are persecuting minorities and when you are objectifying them and making them the Other, you are destroying something in yourself, and the world goes into a tailspin. And so, to me, being pro-Israel and pro-Jewish is part and parcel with the values that I have been fighting for since I was politically conscious and started getting involved in politics. These things are indivisible in my mind. But what is also true, by extension, is that I have to show that same kind of regard to other peoples. And I think it is true to Israel's traditions and its values its founding principles that it has to care about those Palestinian kids. And when I was in Jerusalem and I spoke, the biggest applause that I got was when I spoke about those kids I had visited in Ramallah, and I said to a Israeli audience that it is profoundly Jewish, it is profoundly consistent with Israel's traditions to care about them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3085, "text": "So if that is not translated into policy if we are not willing to take risks on behalf of those values then those principles become empty words, and in fact, in my mind, it makes it more difficult for us to continue to promote those values when it comes to protecting Israel internationally. You are not known as an overly emotive politician, but there was a period in which the relationship between you and the prime minister, and therefore the U.S. government and the Israeli government, seemed very fraught and very emotional. Yeah, and I have to say, ENTITY, I completely disagree with that assessment, and I know you wrote that. And I objected to it. I mean, the fact of the matter is that there was a very particular circumstance in which we had a policy difference that should not be papered over because it goes to the nature of the friendship between the United States and Israel, and how we deal government to government, and how we sort through those issues. Now, a couple of things that I'd say at the outset. In every public pronouncement I have made, I said that the bedrock security relationships between our two countries these are sacrosanct. Military cooperation, intelligence cooperation none of that has been affected. I have maintained, and I think I can show that no U.S. president has been more forceful in making sure that we help Israel protect itself, and even some of my critics in Israel have acknowledged as much. I said that none of this should impact the core strategic relationship that exists between the United States and Israel, or the people-to-people relations that are so deep that they transcend any particular president or prime minister and will continue until the end of time. But what I did say is that when, going into an election, Prime Minister Netanyahu said a Palestinian state would not happen under his watch, or there discussion in which it appeared that Arab-Israeli citizens were somehow portrayed as an invading force that might vote, and that this should be guarded against this is contrary to the very language of the Israeli Declaration of Independence, which explicitly states that all people regardless of race or religion are full participants in the democracy. When something like that happens, that has foreign-policy consequences, and precisely because we are so close to Israel, for us to simply stand there and say nothing would have meant that this office, the Oval Office, lost credibility when it came to speaking out on these issues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3086, "text": "And when I am then required to come to Israel's defense internationally, when there is anti-Semitism out there, when there is anti-Israeli policy that is based not on the particulars of the Palestinian cause but based simply on hostility, I have to make sure that I am entirely credible in speaking out against those things, and that requires me then to also be honest with friends about how I view these issues. Now that makes, understandably, folks both in Israel and here in the United States uncomfortable. But the one argument that I very much have been concerned about, and it has gotten stronger over the last 10 years ... it is less overt than the arguments that a Sheldon Adelson makes, but in some ways can be just as pernicious, is this argument that there should not be disagreements in public. So a lot of times the criticism that was leveled during this period including from you, ENTITY was not that you disagreed with me on the assessment, but rather that it is dangerous or unseemly for us to air these disagreements You did not make that argument I did not make that argument. I spend half my life airing those arguments. But you understand what I am saying, ENTITY. I would get letters from people saying, Listen, ENTITY, I completely support you. I agree with you on this issue, but you should not say these things publicly. Now the truth of the matter is that what we said publicly was fairly spare and mild, and then would be built up it seemed like an article a day, partly because when you get in arguments with friends it is a lot more newsworthy than arguments with enemies. Well, and it is the same problem that I am having right now with the trade deals up on Capitol Hill. The fact that I agree with Elizabeth Warren on 90 percent of issues is not news. That we disagree on one thing is news. But my point, ENTITY, is that we are at enough of an inflection point in terms of the region that trying to pretend like these important, difficult policy questions are not controversial, and that they do not have to be sorted out, I think is a problem. And one of the great things about Israel is, these are arguments that take place in Israel every day. If you sit down in some cafe in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, you are hearing far more contentious arguments, and that is healthy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3087, "text": "That is part of why Americans love Israel, it is part of the reason why I love Israel because it is a genuine democracy and you can express your opinions. But the most important thing, I think, that we can do right now in strengthening Israel's position is to describe very clearly why I have believed that a two-state solution is the best security plan for Israel over the long term; for me to take very seriously Israel's security concerns about what a two-state solution might look like; to try to work through systematically those issues; but also, at the end of the day, to say to any Israeli prime minister that it will require some risks in order to achieve peace. How do you weigh those risks against the risks of doing nothing and just perpetuating the status quo? My argument is that the risks of doing nothing are far greater, and I ultimately it is important for the Israeli people and the Israeli government to make its own decisions about what it needs to secure the people of that nation. But my hope is that over time that debate gets back on a path where there is some semblance of hope and not simply fear, because it feels to me as if ... all we are talking about is based from fear. As a Jewish-majority democracy. We talked about this once. Kibbutzim, and Moshe Dayan, and Golda Meir, and the sense that not only are we creating a safe Jewish homeland, but also we are remaking the world. We are repairing it. We are going to do it the right way. We are going to make sure that the lessons we have learned from our hardships and our persecutions are applied to how we govern and how we treat others. And it goes back to the values questions that we talked about earlier those are the values that helped to nurture me and my political beliefs. It is interesting, when I spoke to some leaders of Jewish organizations a few months back, I said to them, it is true, I have high expectations for Israel, and they are not unrealistic expectations, they are not stupid expectations, they are not the expectations that Israel would risk its own security blindly in pursuit of some idealistic pie-in-the-sky notions. But you want Israel to embody Jewish values.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3088, "text": "I want Israel, in the same way that I want the United States, to embody the Judeo-Christian and, ultimately then, what I believe are human or universal values that have led to progress over a millennium. The same values that led to the end of Jim Crow and slavery. The same values that led to Nelson Mandela being freed and a multiracial democracy emerging in South Africa. The same values that animate our discussion on human rights and our concern that people on the other side of the world who may be tortured or jailed for speaking their mind or worshipping the same values that lead us to speak out against anti-Semitism. I want Israel to embody these values because Israel is aligned with us in that fight for what I believe to be true. Hard decisions. And hard decisions that in peace we will not make. Those are decisions that I have to make every time I deploy U.S. forces. Those are choices that we make with respect to drones, and with respect to our intelligence agencies. And so when I spoke to Prime Minister Netanyahu, for example, about can we come up with a peace plan, I sent out our top military folks to go through systematically every contingency, every possible concern that Israel might have on its own terms about maintaining security in a two-state agreement, and what would it mean for the Jordan Valley, and what would it mean with respect to the West Bank, and I was the first one to acknowledge that you cannot have the risk of terrorists coming up right to the edge of Jerusalem and exposing populations. So this is not an issue of being naive or unrealistic, but ultimately yes, I think there are certain values that the United States, at its best, exemplifies. I think there are certain values that Israel, and the Jewish tradition, at its best exemplifies. And I am willing to fight for those values. Hollande's government Manuel Valls, the prime minister David Cameron we were talking about the line between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. And I know that you have talked about this with Jewish organizations, with some of your Jewish friends how you define the differences and the similarities between these two concepts. Do you think that Israel has a right to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people, and are you aware of the particular circumstances of Jewish history that might prompt that need and desire?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3089, "text": "And if your answer is no, if your notion is somehow that that history does not matter, then that is a problem, in my mind. If, on the other hand, you acknowledge the justness of the Jewish homeland, you acknowledge the active presence of anti-Semitism that it is not just something in the past, but it is current if you acknowledge that there are people and nations that, if convenient, would do the Jewish people harm because of a warped ideology. If you acknowledge those things, then you should be able to align yourself with Israel where its security is at stake, you should be able to align yourself with Israel when it comes to making sure that it is not held to a double standard in international fora, you should align yourself with Israel when it comes to making sure that it is not isolated. But you should be able to say to Israel, we disagree with you on this particular policy. We disagree with you on settlements. We disagree with you on a Jewish-nationalist law that would potentially undermine the rights of Arab citizens. And to me, that is entirely consistent with being supportive of the State of Israel and the Jewish people. Now for someone in Israel, including the prime minister, to disagree with those policy positions that is OK too. And we can have a debate, and we can have an argument. But you cannot equate people of good will who are concerned about those issues with somebody who is hostile towards Israel. And you know, I actually believe that most American Jews, most Jews around the world, and most Jews in Israel recognize as much. And that is part of the reason why I do still have broad-based support among American Jews. It is not because they dislike Israel, it is not because they are not worried about Iran having a nuclear weapon or what Hezbollah is doing in Lebanon. It is because I think they recognize, having looked at my history and having seen the actions of my administration, that I have got Israel's back, but there are values that I share with them that may be at stake if we are not able to find a better path forward than what feels like a potential dead-end right now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjefferygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffery Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffery-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "19-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3099, "text": "ENTITY, I have been talking with some grain farmers who are very upset because your Administration has urged full production, your Secretary of Agriculture talks about a free market, and yet, when push comes to shove, they feel that their sales are being blocked by the grain embargo We have to look at that problem in the long range and still be very cognizant of the short-term difficulties. What we want are stable, substantial markets abroad. We have one with Japan. We are in the process of negotiating one with Poland. We have others that are in being with European countries. But the big potential market on a long-range basis for substantial annual sales is with the Soviet Union, and we are very close. I believe that we will end up with at least a 5-year program that will mean firm, sizable sales 5 million tons or more per year with a possibility of more sales, and all at free market prices in the marketplace in the United States. Now, the problem in the past has been in the last 5 years. One year we sold to the Soviet Union 74 million bushels of grain. Another year we sold 550 million bushels. This year, so far, we have sold 320 million bushels. Well, these wide fluctuations, peaks and valleys, they are not good for the farmer; they are not good for the country. So, we are trying to stabilize a huge market on a firm basis over a period of time. And if my good farmer friends will just be a little patient, I think we will do something they will be very happy with. ENTITY, John Dunlop says that he now favors extending the tax cut. What will you recommend, and are you prepared to at this time? We are in the process right now of finalizing my recommendation in that area. I cannot on this program tell you what the decision is, but we are trying to coordinate a potential tax reduction program with a rigid restriction on expenditures. I think this combination, if we can come up with the right formula, will give our taxpayers a greater opportunity to spend their own money and will cut down Federal expenditures so that we will have a better fiscal situation for the Federal Government. Now, that is one possibility, and hopefully within the next week or so I will be in a position to submit a specific recommendation to the Congress. Now, to follow up, how does Alan Greenspan feel about that at this time? I do not think I ought to reveal his recommendation to me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3100, "text": "Until we finalize this whole package and the timing of it, I do not think I should indicate how any one of my advisers do feel. John Dunlop, of course, as Secretary of Labor, was in a position to publicly state his view because he is Chairman of our labor-management advisory committee, and that Committee, under his leadership, did recommend that these tax reductions that were put into law earlier this year should be extended. So, that is why he was in a position to indicate his personal view. ENTITY, on the grain deal, you indicate that if the farmers will be patient, that they will be happy. They have, to a great degree, been patient with Secretary of Agriculture Butz, and they have been calling for him being taken out as Secretary and many times saying he might be, and there has even been talk of former Nebraskan Clayton Yeutter being put into that office. Can you give us any indication of whether there is any offing in the future of replacing the Secretary, and could you also tell us the value of the Secretary in that position? First, let me indicate that I selected Clayton Yeutter,1 who I think is an outstanding individual, to be one of our top people in our foreign trade negotiations. I think that is an indication of my great feeling for Clayton Yeutter. I happen to believe that Earl Butz has done an excellent job of defending the interests of agriculture across the board. He has been a great exponent of the free marketplace. He has fought Government restrictions so that farmers can run their farms as they see fit. I think Earl Butz has done a fine job, and I asked him to stay and he has agreed to stay until the end of this term. I think most farmers support him. I fully back him. ENTITY, recent disclosures about the Central Intelligence Agency seemed to have weakened our entire intelligence-gathering and interpreting apparatus and as a result also weakened our defense posture. If this is true, what is being done to shore up our intelligence and our defense? I am disturbed about the actions that are being taken by some to expose some of the past operations of the Central Intelligence Agency and our intelligence-gathering capability generally. On the other hand, I think the Congress has a responsibility in a proper way to investigate the intelligence community of the Federal Government. I have been disappointed in some respects. On the other hand, you may have heard that this morning I came to an agreement with Chairman Pike on a method by which we can handle declassified material.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3101, "text": "The vote was l0 to 3 in that committee, which shows that we are working together to handle these delicate matters together, in a proper way. Now in the meantime, or prior to that, I appointed the Rockefeller Commission that investigated the allegations of improper domestic spying by the Central Intelligence Agency. They made some recommendations to me. The Murphy Commission did the same. The net result is, sometime in the very near future I will make specific recommendations to improve the internal workings of the Central Intelligence Agency and the other intelligence groups, and they will not only be administrative but legislative proposals. In that way, I think we can restore confidence in the public for the CIA and at the same time lift the morale of the CIA, which unfortunately has suffered in the last few months. Under no circumstances and I want to be very clear on this will I permit the dismantling or the destruction of an intelligence agency or community, because that does involve our national security. ENTITY, do you believe that the United States should ever consider a position of using food as a weapon or at least as a bargaining agent against oil cartel countries in order to lessen this Nation's dependence on those countries? I would not put it that way. I think the great agricultural productivity of this country can be used affirmatively, one, for humanitarian purposes, and if my recollection is accurate, we, over the past 10 years, provided some $20 billion of P.L. 480 to help many nations in a humane way. In addition, we can use discretely and properly our surpluses for other reasons-and I do not want to expand for other reasons but it is better to put it that way than to come out and say, yes, we are going to do it as a hard-line bargaining principle. We can use it effectively, and we have and will. ENTITY, you voiced your support for Secretary Butz and pointed to his support among the farm community. There has been some concern among farm people in connection with that, that the Secretary has not been sufficiently involved in these grain negotiations as compared to State Department people. What input does Secretary Butz have? We have a grain subcommittee of the Economic Policy Board, and on at least three occasions where I have attended those meetings, Secretary Butz has been present, and I have had several meetings. I can assure you that Secretary Butz is an affirmative spokesman for agriculture in these areas.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3102, "text": "On the other hand, he does recognize that we have to look at it in the long range, and I am sure that when the results of these negotiations are published, Secretary Butz part in it will be a big plus for agriculture as well as for the department. As a follow-up on that, if I may, a large grain exporter in the upper Midwest the other day contended that a mid-October lifting of the moratorium on the grain shipments will come too late, that the Russians will have gone elsewhere. Is this being taken into consideration in your planning? We keep a daily check on world grain supplies. And from our point of view, fortunately, we are about the only grain supplier left in the world. And if anybody really wants to buy sizable amounts of grain in the future in 1975, they will have to come to the United States. ENTITY, I am told that 100 years ago today ENTITY Grant visited Omaha. I do not have a question related to that, but I thought you would like to know that. And as you all know, I was born in Omaha not quite 100 years ago. You have adopted Vice ENTITY Rockefeller's plan for an energy independence authority, which involves about $100 billion over a 10-year period. Now, this is a mammoth Federal intervention in the capital marketplace, which is the exact opposite, really, of what you have always said-as a governmental policy, you wanted hands off. Now, does this mean you have given up on the idea that the oil companies can come up with alternate sources if you decontrol oil prices? Well, that authority is primarily for the purpose of undertaking the financing of the synthetic fuel programs which are new, where there could be some failure, where there is a certain degree of uncertainty as to whether they will be productive, whether they will be financially responsible. You have to have, in my opinion, this kind of authority to get those synthetic fuel programs underway. And there are some other areas in addition to synthetic fuels, but it is basically an instrument like the RFC back in the '30s and '40s for example, the synthetic rubber program which was financed by RFC. This is not an attempt to take over the private financing of ordinary and regular programs and projects, but it does aim at helping us exploit breakthroughs in the scientific world so that synthetic fuels can be more readily made available to the public.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3103, "text": "I do not think anybody would disagree with that goal, but my question was more to the point of, will not this really create another huge bureaucracy, whereas your whole thrust has been to shrink the bureaucracy? But if you will recall my State of the Union Message, I said I would advocate no new programs except those related to energy. So this falls within that exception. ENTITY, you have been urging the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to report out on the Sinai agreements by Friday. The problem there is that the two parties Israel and Egypt had agreed by, I think, early next week to sign the necessary documents and start the implementation of the withdrawal and the change of lines and so forth. Israel has said that it will not start the implementation until the Congress approves the utilization of up to 200 American technicians. So, we want it through by the time of the signing so that Israel and Egypt will both sign. Egypt has already signed, but Israel has this reservation. So, time is of the essence, so we can get both of those parties to move toward the actual implementation. You have said that you would like to see the orderly development of nuclear power, and this would certainly be a help in gaining our independence as far as energy is concerned. What do you see in the future for getting it straightened out so that we can look at it as a hopeful sign? We have had too many plant cancellations of nuclear power in the last 12 months very few if any for safety reasons, most of them for financing reasons. We expect there will be a resurgence of these projects in the months ahead. In the meantime, of course, we are spending vast amounts of money in the Federal Government to make even more certain the safety of nuclear powerplants. It is interesting to point out, however, of all of the nuclear powerplants in operation today in the United States, there has never been one fatality not one. But that does not mean we should not continue to find safer and better ways for the development of nuclear power. And I am optimistic as we try to make ourselves less vulnerable to foreign oil cartels, that nuclear powerplants will come on the line in greater numbers. But they are starting to question what the amount of uranium is at this point, while we are talking about millions and millions going into these plants, and then question the shortage already. I have recommended to the Congress what we call a uranium enrichment program which will take care of that contingency. That problem will not arise for 4 or 5 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3104, "text": "But we have to get underway with this supplementary program through either the diffusion process or the centrifuge process-so that we can take care of that difficulty when it arises in 5 years or thereabouts. ENTITY, your airplane landed today just a short distance from the headquarters of the Strategic Air Command. Fifteen years ago, this country's strategic superiority stood unchallenged in the world. Today, instead of superiority we talk of equivalency. There has been a slide on our side at the same time the U.S.S.R. has become more and more powerful and is continuing to do so. Either through the Vladivostok agreement, where we set the 2,400 limit on launchers and 1,320 limit on MIRVing, either through that process, setting a cap which will provide equivalency, or through us maintaining our program to meet the challenge of the Soviet Union, we will maintain, I can assure you, as far as I am concerned, an adequate equivalency in strategic capability. I would prefer to do it through a SALT II agreement if we can get one. That is fair to both sides and sets a cap. But if we cannot , I can assure you that I will recommend whatever the budget requirements are adequate fundings for SAC operations and for all other related strategic programs. Do you believe that the B-1 will continue at full speed in spite of the problems in Congress with the budget? I cannot guarantee what Congress is going to do. I can only doubly guarantee you what I will do. We are going to keep the B-1 program going to the maximum capability productionwise, trainingwise, deploymentwise. I get very upset when the Congress slows it down for one reason or another. But we are going to keep after them because it is vitally important. ENTITY, is your Administration proposing any new means to lessen the welfare redtape and expenditures in this country? Yes, we are, on an almost daily basis, trying to do it in HEW. I have got my Domestic Council now working on a way to try and remedy some of the defects in the food stamp program and there are many of them, not only cost but bad management.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3105, "text": "In the meantime, we hope to well, we are, we are not hoping Vice ENTITY Rockefeller is going to have a series of meetings around the country where all people, those who want more or those who want less in the field of welfare, can come in and testify and make specific recommendations so we will have the benefit of people at the local level. But in the meantime, we are working I mean literally working to try and improve, cut down the mistakes and the cost of welfare so that we can get more deserved welfare to the people who ought to have it and cut out those that should not qualify. It is my understanding, ENTITY, you will be meeting with Mrs. Caroline Stenderwick, a local representative of the MIA organization, before your departure from Omaha. The families of these missing men tell us they are seeking a more aggressive attitude from your Administration, especially from Secretary Kissinger, in determining the fate of their husbands and fathers. Is there anything especially hopeful you will be able to tell Mrs. Stenderwick when you meet with her today? I have met at least once as ENTITY and once as Vice ENTITY with the representatives of the MIA. In addition, on several occasions, in other communities Dallas, for example I have met with either parents or widows of MIA's. I can assure you that the Defense Department, the State Department, and myself have made every possible effort that we can to get the North Vietnamese to permit us to move in and check on the sites or the locations where we understand there is some possibility a crash might have occurred or a person might have escaped. But the North Vietnamese have totally violated the January 1973 accords by failing to permit us to carry out these investigations. Now, the House of Representatives has just approved and appointed a committee to investigate the whole subject. We will give that committee, under Congressman Montgomery of Mississippi, our full cooperation, lay out in detail what we have done and what the problem is which, in this case, is North Vietnam. I can assure her, as I am saying here, that we have made and will continue to make a maximum effort in this regard. I was going to ask a very light question, ENTITY, but now I am afraid to after that heavy answer. Some people feel that there is a lack of leadership or perhaps I should say a lack of inspirational leadership from the top in the energy crisis situation, and I will tell you what I mean by that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3106, "text": "All of the accent seems to be put on how can we become independent of foreign sources and obviously we have to do that but should not more emphasis really be put on conserving, because this is probably only the forerunner of a number of world shortages and we do not have any feeling of crisis about it. Now, do you really think, for instance, this country should continue to use 30 to 35 percent of the world's energy? We have always said the answer to the energy problem for the United States is, one, stimulation of new sources and conservation of the energy we have. Every document I have ever sent to the Congress, every statement I have ever made, emphasizes both new sources of energy and conservation of those that we have. In my energy program that I submitted in January of this year, we put a considerable amount of emphasis on conservation. The United States has squandered energy; we squander energy today. And we have to convince people they should drive less, they should use less energy in their homes, not quite as cool in the summer or hot in the winter. We have urged the automotive industry to build automobiles that have a higher degree of efficiency. And I am glad to report you may have seen the new models, I think, increase the energy use or they will cut back on gasoline to an average of 13 percent. I could not agree with you more, but you know it takes a crisis sometimes to get people to do what they should. But we are really in a crisis, are we not? Then what I was trying to find out is, do not you really think a direct appeal to the people I think people would sacrifice; I really do. We have tried it. We have made some headway, obviously, because the use of energy is down, whether it is gasoline, whether it is heating oil, whether it is any of the other sources of energy. But it is not enough, and I continue to urge it, and of course, the increase of price by the OPEC nations ought to make people more conscious of our vulnerability and make Congress more responsive to passing a better or any-legislation. ENTITY, in the wake of the recent attacks on your life in some cases maybe an alleged attack on your life-has it caused you to take second thoughts or your family ask you to take second thoughts about running for reelection, and are there any conditions under which you would not seek reelection next year?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3107, "text": "I can foresee no circumstances that would preclude me from seeking election in 1976. My family fully supports my candidacy. They are enthusiastic about it. My wife thinks I ought to be a little more careful and cautious as I travel around the country, and she is not the only one, obviously. But we are using, I think, greater discretion and prudence, and on the other hand, for me to sit in Washington and just go through papers, making decisions when I can do that, and at the same time come to Omaha or to Chicago or other places, I think it is important. The American people ought to have an opportunity to see firsthand or to listen more directly with their ENTITY, and we are not going to let unusual circumstances deter us from a responsible effort to travel in this country. Many Presidents lately have made declarations concerning crime and the problems of crime and that something has to be done about it. Certainly, this is an area you must have given a lot of thought to lately. If you could point out the biggest need you think needs to change today to help stop the pattern that crime has taken in the Nation, what would it be? I set that forth in a crime message to the Congress where I said, Our concern today ought to be for the victims of crime. The crime message that I sent to the Congress calls for mandatory sentences for those that participate in a crime of violence using a gun, and we have urged the courts to increase their confinement of convicted criminals. Too many criminals today, after they have been convicted, are put off on probation. There ought to be a penalty for the committing of a crime, and that means confinement. Whether it is 6 months or some other term, I believe mandatory sentences are required in certain crimes. I believe the courts have to be firmer, and I think they you know, it is unbelievable, but a very, very high percentage of crime today is done by a very limited number of people, professional criminals, and they ought to be behind the bars. ENTITY, there has been from time to time there have been reports of controversy between Dr. Schlesinger and Dr. Kissinger, the latest being the question of the Pershing missile for Israel. Is there indeed disharmony in your Cabinet in that regard, and if so, what are you doing about it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersomaha", "title": "Interview With Reporters in Omaha.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-omaha", "publication_date": "01-10-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3121, "text": "Do you want to venture a guess on who is going to come out on top tomorrow-Democratic field? I will let them have that all to themselves and decide. Want to tell us who you would prefer to face in November? No, no-I will offer no help in who they might want to select. Would you tell us if you have been at all surprised by Gary Hart's surge in the primaries so far? Well, maybe might not have picked that, and yet I think I can understand-a kind of a new face. But I still think that it is too early to really be naming any front-runners or anything in that race. ENTITY, a lot of us pundits have been predicting that this race would turn into a generational conflict. I recall you in the past talking about how-finally how America needs to return to the stature and to the values of its past. Will you be adjusting that strategy if you are facing an opponent who talks about, compares himself-backing the future, as opposed to the policies of the past? No, I have always felt and based any campaigning or anything that I do on what we do, not what the other fellow says he is going to do-what we do and what we plan to do. I do not see any need for any generational struggle in here, but if there is, maybe we can settle it with an arm wrestle. Is it true what Gary Hart says, that you and Walter Mondale represent the policies of the past? As a matter of fact-it might be in the past in that, to the extent that some of the things were principles that this country was based on-but I think that what we have done has been a departure, certainly from the past 40-odd years of Democratic domination in the country in which they have held both Houses of the Congress. ENTITY, can you give us some idea about what you would do in the next term to control the deficits? Are we talking-would you-are you considering possibly another increase, or an increase in taxes by changing the system, say, or would you make any further cuts in entitlement programs? what we think are so-called loopholes that offer not quite fair benefits to some and not to all. We have also discussed and I have asked the Treasury Department to look into something that cannot happen in this coming year, it is going to take more study than this, and that is a simplification of our tax structure.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3122, "text": "We need to look at ways to get the billions and billions of dollars that are not being paid in taxes-owed by people legitimately and not by way of loopholes; in this instance, just outright violations of the tax code. To that extent, yes, we are going to do that. But for the future, we have to bring down the percentage of the gross national product that government is taking in this country. See, I have a degree in economics myself. But I do remember that when I was getting my degree, it was more or less a standard acceptance in economics that the business cycle, so called, and the lean periods previous to that are-what we now call recessions and depressions-when they did occur, that usually it was when the government had gone beyond a certain point in the percentage of gross national product that it was taking. And that was just more or less accepted as standard. And I think that after we get what we have called a down payment, which is about all we can get in this year, with the limited time that Congress is going to be here, then I think, in a bipartisan way, we are going to have to continue to look at government, as to how, structurally, we can reduce the share that government is taking. Can you give us an idea, though-I mean, could you give us some specifics about what you might do? Well, let me give them to this extent. Some of them you could look at, and they could be contained in the Grace commission-or committee reports. Here was a look at government by almost 2,000 top business leaders in the private sector-not only from institutions and so forth but from the business and financial world-that looked at government as they would look at a business if they were thinking of merging or taking it over-as to things that are wrong or that could be changed. And we are really seriously looking at these recommendations, 2,478-or -28?-but anyway, it is almost 2,500 recommendations that they have made. And many of them would require legislative action, because they would result in changes in procedure in the processes of government. In the negotiations that have been going on in the last few weeks on this down payment that you referred to, what concessions have you expressed willingness to make? And what concessions might you be willing to make for your part in these negotiations?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3123, "text": "Well, frankly, I have lost a little faith in the bipartisan approach to this, because the other side seemed more interested, I think, in politics than they did in meeting us in any way on trying to achieve this down payment. So, I am and have been meeting with the leadership of our own in the House and in the Senate on that very thing, and will be willing, once we all come to agreement and have settled on a plan-and I cannot go beyond that, because we have not -but I will be willing then to go forward with our own proposal and hope that we can, with the support of the people, that we can get bipartisan support for it. So, you are saying you have not even put forth a proposal yet? You have not, even yet, put forth a proposal in these negotiations? Well, this is in our own discussions within, I might say, the family, meaning the Republican leadership, both the House and Senate and myself. We are discussing-and there are a number of viewpoints on figures having to do with spending reductions-and I think we are pretty much agreed on that tax revenues would be-if there are any-would be obtained from corrections in the tax program and not in any change in the rates. ENTITY, not too long ago your finance chairman in Mississippi, William Munger, was reflecting back on the Republican's defeat in the gubernatorial race in that State last year, and he said that in order for Republicans to do well in Mississippi, they had to attract black votes, but if they did the things necessary to attract black votes, they'd be going against Republican philosophy. Do you agree with that? No, I think everything that we have done in our economic approach is of benefit to everyone. I know that there are charges being made-I listened to the debate-that somehow our attempts at economies and all have penalized people who were dependent on government aid. The simple fact of the matter is we are spending more on help for the people and for the needy than has ever been spent before in history. Our budget cuts have been reductions in the increase planned in spending. We have not come to some place where we are spending less than had been spent. But, sir, blacks in Alabama say that they are not going to vote for you. They say they are going to vote for the Democrat, whoever he is. How are you going to counter what they perceive to be an administration that does not have their interest at heart?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3124, "text": "Well, you said the key word, that they perceive to be. And I am just going to hope that in the campaign we can reveal to them that they have not been given the truth, that they are the victims of a lot of demagoguery that has portrayed us as guilty of things we have not done. Do you think that all the campaigning among eight contenders for the Democratic nomination has changed public perception of you along those lines or along other lines on Well, even before a campaign started, this has been pretty much the theme of the other side. I have been held up as eating my young, that we have been hostile to the poor and our tax program benefits the rich. How can a program that cuts taxes evenly, percentagewise, across the board-thus leaving the same rate of progression in our progressive tax system-how can that be beneficial to the rich and detrimental to the others? How can it be unfair to the people of lower income or the poor to reduce inflation from double digits-12.5 percent when we came here-down to a third of that or less, less than a third of that. When the people with the least-let us take someone with $10,000 of income between-through 2 years, 1979 and 1980-before we got here. By the end of 1980 that $10,000 would only buy $8,000 worth. He was getting $5,000 a year. He got a $1,000 cut in his ability to buy each year. That was probably the worst tax on the elderly with fixed incomes, the worst tax on the poor who have to spend most of their earnings on subsistence, on the necessities. The person with luxury income who spends a minor portion of it on necessities and the rest on luxuries, they were not really penalized as much by inflation. So, I think everything we have done has been beneficial to everyone at every level. You mention the elderly. If I could ask about that. The large elderly population of Florida-and they-many voters seem to be convinced that you, more than the Democrats, have been trying to restrain the growth or cut back entitlement programs such as social security and medicare. First of all, is that a correct perception? And is it possible in a second term that you would be advocating further cutbacks?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3125, "text": "I have said repeatedly that programs like that-there are things that need to be done, but we must never pull the rug out from those people presently receiving their payments from the program and dependent on it. You cannot suddenly undermine them or break your contract with them. Reforms, if there are such to be made, must be made, looking toward the future, on people not yet dependent and who would have plenty of time and warning with regard to such changes. Again, this was-if you will remember, that was the issue of the 1982 campaign. We were guilty of trying to tell the Congress and our opponents that social security was facing financial disaster and it could hit it as early as July 1983. They denied that. I remember hearing the Speaker of the House, himself, deny that that was true. And then after the election was over, we all got together in a bipartisan group and without any animus, came up with a plan to save social security because it would be broke by July of 1983. And we came up with that program. It was not a permanent answer to some of the problems, but it did buy us a great many years down the road before we would again be in the fiscal spot of that kind. Now, as to what we have done in social security since we have been here, the average married couple on social security has had a $180-a-month increase. So, I, again, do not think that we were double-crossing anyone. ENTITY, in 1980 West Virginia was one of, I think, half a dozen States that voted for Carter. And now, 4 years later unemployment is hovering around 15 percent, and the coal industry and the steel industry are ailing, and some Federal programs that West Virginians have depended on have been cut. What would you say to the guy in the street in West Virginia to convince him that he should vote for you in 1984? Well, first of all, we know that unemployment is never consistent with the national average. I described this to some of our own people a little while ago, that to think that it is like the man that drowned trying to wade across a river whose average depth was 3 feet. There are those pockets and certain areas that are going to be hit harder than others. But in the surge which-in reducing unemployment-which is greater than anything we have seen in the last 30 years-even those hard-hit areas are being benefited.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3126, "text": "This is why we have for a couple of years now been trying to get the enterprise zone legislation through the Congress. This is a program-and I was amazed when one of the candidates in the debate last night started talking about we must look at tax incentives to help industry and so-forth put people back to work. Well, that is what the enterprise zones are all about, picking those hard-hit spots, both rural and urban, and generating employment through the use of tax incentives. And so far, a number of States have gotten tired of waiting for the Congress to act and do it at a national level, and have put in their own enterprise zone programs. And every one of them is proving tremendously successful. But, knowing that you might get around to unemployment, I just decided some figures might be of interest to you. You represent two, four, six, eight States-and all in the same region. In every one of them the figures for the peak of unemployment, and the figures for-I cannot give them to you except for one State now-but in December, as of the December level of the comeback, were considerably down from the peak. And in the State that you just mentioned, your own, at the peak, unemployment in West Virginia was 21. By December it was down to 15.7. We will not know for awhile, because when the Labor Department gives you the overall statistics, they do not break it down to States at the present figure. It takes them awhile to break it down as to States. So, all I have are the November figures, except for Florida, and that is because they do break it down for the 10 most populous States earlier than they do for the rest. Florida was 8.6 at its peak-or, wait a minute-Florida was 10.4 at its peak, and in December was down to 7.5. But to give you an idea of what the rest of the figures may look like when we get them-for the present, Florida is now down to 6. Ours was at 11.4 in December and in January was back up to 13.5. I mean, some of that has to do with seasonal- Yes, but at the peak you were 16.7. In December you were 12.3. Well, in January it was 13.5. I will be very interested in seeing what it comes out as from February. Is there anything else that you think that the States could do to help pull themselves up?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3127, "text": "Well, I think most States, as far as I can see, are doing all they can, just as we are. Maybe-and, you know, all of your States, particularly there in the Sunbelt, you are going to have to recognize also that your reduction in unemployment may be a little slower because of the migration to the Sunbelt. And that means that newcomers coming in, without jobs and looking for jobs, are temporarily going to distort the figures. Back on the economic issue for just 1 minute, back to the budgetary thing-when you campaigned for ENTITY, one of your promises, of course, was to balance the budget by 1984. I wonder what you look at as the main reason for that. What happened to Reaganomics that made it not work like you wanted it to? Nothing happened to Reaganomics. And I am glad you asked this question. Yes, I had the help of some of the finest economists in the country in working on the program that I call the economic recovery program. And toward the end of the summer, 1980, I announced that plan, and based our projections-that, yes, it could balance the budget by '83, based on all the projections that those economists at that time-before the election. Between that announcement and November, that projection was no longer valid, because the economy in 1980 was deteriorating so fast, and had not been projected to do so by any of these notable economists. So, it continued to worsen, and by the time of the Inaugural-then even a later time-was beyond any prediction; it had continued to get worse. Inflation, then, for '79 and '80 had been double digit both years. Now, when I started-you have got to remember that the ENTITY comes in not with his own budget. You are still bound until the following October by the budget of the previous administration. Nor was my program in effect. We were still trying to get it. And in July of 1981 was when the further big dip came. Now, some economists have said, well, we had a 1979, '80 recession, and then the thing that happened in July was another-a different recession. And the bottom fell out with the interest rates that stayed high, the automobile industry, the housing industry-either one of which can start a recession by itself.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3128, "text": "So, nothing of what happened and the great surge to 10.8 percent in unemployment-none of that could be attributed to our program, because our program had not started. And then, as our program was implemented-and remember, it was only implemented in stages. It took 3 years to get the 25-percent tax cut. Other things that were implemented-and we never got all of the spending cuts. As a matter of fact, we got a little less than half of what we asked in spending cuts. And that is to this day. Now, I could turn around and say that maybe the recovery might have been even better if we had gotten-remember that one stage of our tax cut-10 percent of it-was going to go into effect retroactively to January of 1981, and we did not get it then. And when we did get it, after the drop had occurred, it was only 5 percent, and it did not go into effect until October, which meant that it was about 1 1/4 percent when it only went on for 3 years-or 3 months. And so, I have to say that all of the recovery has taken place after our program went into effect, and none of our program was in effect when the bottom fell out. ENTITY, I want to get clear on one thing. Are you-your comments earlier about this bipartisan-bipartisan meetings over the deficit-when you said you are now pursuing your own plan with other Republican leaders. Are you saying that you have abandoned altogether any hope of reaching any kind of compromise with the Democrats? Are you through talking with them? I hope that maybe when we come forth with this plan and say, Look, here is something now, we will tell you, we are ready to go with; here is a plan -I would like to have, because we cannot get such a plan unless we have bipartisan support. I would like to think that they would do it. But what I meant was that to sit down with them and start from scratch to negotiate, they were very unwilling. We had great difficulty getting them to even meet. And, finally, one meeting they just simply walked away on one issue and refused to talk. And it was not very encouraging to us. Can you still-you do not have any idea about how soon you might have a plan ready to put forward? I am hoping- -before the elections, though. We have got to move on this deficit matter and move fast.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3129, "text": "Some of your economic advisers have been saying for some time now, and Wall Street analysts, that we have got to do something about the deficit. And you have just said it needs to be handled or taken by the horns as soon as possible. But you have been saying for some time that-or painting the picture that things are going to be fine, things are going to be okay. And that is not exactly the picture that is come from some of your advisers, if we do not take control of the deficit immediately. And some of the economists-and some of them, I think, are trying to scare the Congress into recognizing that we should be dealing with it. Not scare you, but the Congress. Not scare me, no, because, look, I am not one to underestimate the deficits. I have been talking about them for 30 years. Is it impossible for us to-well, no, you cannot remember; all of you are too young, so it would have to be history for you-but for almost half a century the other party has been in control, as I said earlier, of both Houses of the Congress. And Congress is the only one that can deal with these things. A ENTITY has a veto power, but ENTITY cannot spend a single dime. There is nothing in the Constitution that gives ENTITY the right to spend anything. But for almost this half-century we have every year run deficits. It was almost a trillion dollars by the time we came here. And there were many of us who opposed this. And we were told at the time that the national debt did not matter because we owed it to ourselves. We were told the deficit spending and a little inflation was necessary to maintain prosperity. Well, some of us did not think that added up. And I can show you speeches I made 20, 25 years ago in which I said inflation cannot continue without going out of control eventually. You cannot go down this road. The deficit spending and the piling up of the debt that-it has never worked in history; it never will. Well, now, suddenly, with the big dip that came in July in that recession, with millions more people added-the unemployed, who became wards of the government, which increased the spending, but who were no longer paying the taxes, which decreased that; the very fact that we improve the inflation figure also militated against government revenues, because inflation is a source of tax increase.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3130, "text": "And we did not get-we did not think we could reduce inflation that fast. We thought that there would be higher revenues than there turned out to be because of licking inflation. Well, all of this, for them now to suddenly become aware of deficits-and yet, when you try to talk to them, what is the only answer that they have for curbing the deficit? Well-and they will also agree to cut defense spending. Well, defense spending right now is down to a little more than a fourth of the budget. Defense spending, historically, the days of Jack Kennedy, was virtually a half of the budget. Under Jack Kennedy, it was 47.8 percent. So, the-and the increase in taxes-they doubled taxes in the 5 years before we got here. And the deficits increased, because when you increase taxes, they increase spending. And may I point to the 1983 budget resolution passed by the Democratic majority in the House. And they really did not think that it would ever amount to anything or be passed by anyone else. But, if you will remember, they described it as a reaffirmation of Democratic principles. And it did call for somewhere around $70 billion in increased taxes. But it also called for that much increased spending for new programs, social programs. So, this was where we philosophically just were in complete disagreement-that they think you can solve the budget deficit by increasing taxes. They do not even pay attention to the fact that this could subvert the recovery that we re now having and put us back where we were. But beyond that, they have made it plain, and, indeed, their own candidates talk of new spending programs. When you are oh the campaign trail, how much of an issue are you going to make of the school prayer issue and the abortion? Well, I am hoping that before I get out there that we will have the school prayer amendment passed in the Congress. And here again, the effort that is being made to portray that as someway, somehow we are talking compulsory prayer; we are going to compel the schools. I am sure there would be some schools-all we are asking is that they have the right to if they want to. But I think it is a right that we had for the bulk of our entire history in this country. And it did not destroy the country at all. As a matter of fact, crime rates were lower, and we did not have drug epidemics, and all sorts of things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3131, "text": "Let me ask a question about drugs. There is a lot of reports, including administration reports, that there are more illegal drugs coming into this country than ever, especially cocaine-much of it coming through Florida-despite intensified enforcement in Florida and elsewhere. Would you say that that represents a failure of that drug strategy?  Well now, wait a minute-I am going to have to ask, but-you know, I have to tell you something about this room. I do not know whether you have noticed it or not-out there in that center of the room under the dome, you kind of disappear a little on me. I am having so much fun. I was asking about the illegal drug shipments into the country. And the evidence is that there is more illegal drugs coming in than ever before-at least in recent years and despite intensified enforcement in Florida and other places. And what I am wondering is whether you think that because of that that there is going to be a need to change the drug enforcement strategy, and whether the drug enforcement strategy that you have employed has been a success? Then this-if this is a new figure that I have not obtained-our task force in Florida, which is the first time that we have ever put the Federal Government, the State government, and the local authorities, the drug enforcement authorities, and the military involved in trying to head this off-this shipment from out of the country coming in-was so successful in Florida that this is where, why we went to 12 such task forces all around the country on our borders to try and have the same success. When you have got the coastlines that we have got and the borders that we have, I do not think you will ever solve the problem totally by intercepting the drugs. The answer is going to be the kind that has Nancy down in Houston. To really be successful, you are going to have to take the customer away from the pusher. And this we are embarked on also, as you know, with great efforts all through the country. But the figures that we have is that-and the reason for the rest of the other 11 task forces were-that we so slowed it down in Florida and reduced it in Florida, that they began seeking new entry points around the country. But we are the owner now of a fleet of cabin cruisers and yachts and airplanes and helicopters and trucks and cars.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3132, "text": "And down there, the last time I was in Florida I remember being taken into a big building there at the airport and shown what we had intercepted, but also on a table that was about the size of that desk, the first time in my life I saw $20 million in cash stacked up there in bills that had been taken away from the drugdealers. It is not just a fellow on a corner with something in his pocket to sell. It is coming in in freighters. It is coming in in airplanes and everything else. But we have stepped up our efforts and have been tremendously successful. Do you think the military can be used to stop, like, particularly some of the drug smuggling that is coming in on that Mobile corridor? What we used was we used their radar facilities; also their air surveillance for information that we needed. I do not think they actually participated in any of the arrests, but they provided the surveillance and the information for us. If they can see an enemy coming in, I can see that. I had just one final question for you related to defense. This year for the third year now you are requesting in your defense budget funds for chemical weapons production. And of course, Congress has narrowly defeated these proposals for the last 2 years. There is been a suggestion made in the last week by some Democratic House Members that any proposal for funding for chemical weapons should be tied to legislation requiring the administration to make a new initiative on talks with the Soviets on chemical weapons control. So, my question is, first, do you think that the United States is doing all it can in this area? Would you agree to a proposal like that? And also, do you see any reasons now why Congress might be willing to pass the chemical weapons appropriation when they have not been? If they were responsible, they would, because the very thing that they are talking about we are going to be ready very shortly to table a treaty for discussion of banning chemical weapons. But the reason why they would be more of help if they would okay the spending is, how better to get the other side, then, to agree to a treaty with us banning this; how much better able we will be if they know that if they do not do that, they will have to face the fact that we have chemical weapons that we can use against them. In other words, it is the same as in the nuclear field. Yes, we want to get them into a verifiable treaty banning chemical weapons.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoutheastregionaleditorsforeignanddomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Southeast Regional Editors on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-southeast-regional-editors-foreign-and-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "12-03-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3140, "text": "Hello, ENTITY, can you hear me? What is your impression of Proposition 187, included in the California ballot? I am opposed to it. I do believe that the Federal Government has an obligation to do more to try to help California deal with the problems of illegal immigration. And I have worked hard on that, along with Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer. We have almost doubled the border guards in southern California; we have increased our sending the illegal immigrants who have been convicted of crimes back home. We have given money to California for the very first time to deal with the costs of imprisonment. I have tried to get much more money for education and health care costs of immigration to California. But 187 operates primarily against children. It says, kick the children out of the health clinics. That could cause health problems for the general population. It says, kick the children out of the schools, which means teachers are turned into police officers. It means that the kids can be on the street causing problems for themselves and for others. We have already got too many children on the street. So I believe we have to do more. I found a big immigration mess when I became ENTITY 21 months ago. But this is not the answer, in my opinion, and I hope the voters will turn out and vote and reject 187. It is a way of dividing our people, it is clearly unconstitutional, and it is looking for easy answers to a tough problem. After all, some of the people that are for 187 are part of the problem. When Governor Wilson was Senator Wilson, he responded to the powerful forces in California that wanted more illegal immigrants in California to do work. He sponsored legislation to make it more difficult to remove illegal immigrants from the workplace by going easier on the employers. Now he, all of a sudden, has turned 180 degrees on this issue. But this is a complicated issue without a simple solution. I am committed to working with you to find a solution. I hope that our listeners, our viewers, will turn out and vote on Tuesday and vote against 187, and I hope they will come to the Kaiser Center in Oakland tomorrow where I am going to have a rally at 2 o'clock. if 187 is approved, do you think it will affect the NAFTA treaty with Mexico? I do not know that it will affect NAFTA, but it will certainly affect our relations with Mexico.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithluiseschegoyankdtvsanfrancisco", "title": "Interview With Luis Eschegoyan of KDTV, San Francisco", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-luis-eschegoyan-kdtv-san-francisco", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3141, "text": "This latest idea floated by the Secretary of State John Kerry, picked up by the Russians, is it possible this could avert a U.S. military strike on Syria? And you know, I think it is certainly a positive development when the Russians and the Syrians both make gestures towards dealing with these chemical weapons. This is what we have been asking for, not just over the last week or the last month, but for the last couple of years, because these chemical weapons pose a significant threat to all nations and to the United States in particular. That is why 98 percent of humanity has said we do not use these. That protects our troops and it protects children like the ones that we saw on those videos inside of Syria. I have to say that it is unlikely that we would've arrived at that point, where there were even public statements like that, without a credible military threat to deal with the chemical weapons use inside of Syria. But we are going to run this to ground. And John Kerry and the rest of my national security team will engage with the Russians and the international community to see, can we arrive at something that is enforceable and serious. You know, one reason that this may have a chance of success is that even Syria's allies, like Iran, detest chemical weapons. Iran, you know, unfortunately was the target of chemical weapons at the hands of Saddam Hussein back during the Iraq/Iran War. And so we may be able to arrive at a consensus in which it does not solve the underlying problems of a civil war in Syria, but it does solve the problem that I am trying to focus on right now, which is making sure that you do not have over 400 children gassed indiscriminately by these chemical weapons. Ban Ki-moon, the U.N. secretary general, says not only control the stockpiles of chemical weapons, but then go ahead and destroy them. He is ready to take that to the U.N. Security Council. That is a lot better than deterring the Syrians from going ahead and using these chemical weapons. Absolutely, and that is why we are going -- we are going to take this seriously, but I have to consistently point out that we have not seen these kinds of gestures up until now. And in part, the fact that the U.S. administration and I have said we are serious about this, I think, has prompted some interesting conversations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithwolfblitzercnnsthesituationroom2", "title": "Interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN's The Situation Room", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-wolf-blitzer-cnns-the-situation-room-2", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3142, "text": "And these are conversations that I have had directly with Mr. Putin. When I was at the G20, we had some time to discuss this and I believe that Mr. Putin does not see the use of chemical weapons as a good thing inside of Syria, or any place else. And so it is possible that we can get a breakthrough, but it is going to have to be followed up on and we do not want just a stalling or delaying tactic to put off the pressure that we have on there right now. We have to maintain this pressure, which is why I will still be speaking to the nation tomorrow about why I think this is so important. Well, you know, I think that it is important for Assad to understand that, you know, the chemical weapons ban which has been in place is one that the entire civilized world, just about, respects and observes. It is something that protects our troops, even when we are in the toughest war theaters, from being threatened by these chemical weapons. It is something that protects women and children and civilians because these weapons, by definition, are indiscriminate; they do not just target somebody in uniform. And you know, I suspect that some of Assad's allies recognize the mistake he made in using these weapons and it may be that he is under pressure from them as well. You know, again, this does not solve the underlying terrible conflict inside of Syria, but if we can accomplish this limited goal without taking military action, that would be my preference. On the other hand, if we do not maintain and move forward with a credible threat of military pressure, I do not think we will actually get the kind of agreement I'd like to see. You are being seen right now on CNN and CNN International around the world, including in Damascus. What I'd like you to do, ENTITY, if you are amenable to doing it, look into the camera, talk directly to President Bashar al-Assad, tell him specifically what you think he must do to avert a U.S. military strike. You know, I do not need to talk in the camera. I suspect he is got people who will be watching this. He is probably watching it himself.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithwolfblitzercnnsthesituationroom2", "title": "Interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN's The Situation Room", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-wolf-blitzer-cnns-the-situation-room-2", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3143, "text": "We have been very clear about what we expect, and that is, do not use chemical weapons, control the chemical weapons and now, because we have seen Assad's willingness to use chemical weapons, we are going to have to go further and give the international community assurances that they will not be used potentially by getting them out of there, at minimum, making sure that international control over those chemical weapons takes place. That can be accomplished and it does not solve the broader political situation. I would say to Mr. Assad, we need a political settlement so that you are not slaughtering your own people and, by the way, encouraging some elements of the opposition to engage in some terrible behavior as well. You know, what I am thinking about is right now, though, how do we make sure that we can verify that we do not have chemical weapons that can be used, not only inside of Syria, but potentially could drift outside of Syria? He said in an interview with Charlie Rose that if you, United States, attack, launch military strikes, he said he will respond anythinghe said expect anything, not only from him, but from his allies. That sounds like a threat to the United States. Assad does not have a lot of capability. He has capability relative to children. He has capability relative to an opposition that is still getting itself organized and are not professional, trained fighters. He does not have a credible means to threaten the United States. His allies, Iran and Hezbollah, could potentially engage in asymmetrical strikes against us, but frankly, the kind of threats that they could pose against us are typical of the kinds of threats that we are dealing with around the world that I have spoken of recently, which is embassies that are being threatened, you know, U.S. personnel in the region. Those are threats that we deal with on an ongoing basis. They are always of concern. Obviously, we saw the situation in Yemen just a few weeks ago where we wanted to respond by getting some of our folks out of there. But the notion that Mr. Assad could significantly threaten the United States is just not the case. 9/11, the anniversary this Wednesday, should Americans expect some sort of attack? I think that we are always on heightened alert on 9/11 and we will continue to be.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithwolfblitzercnnsthesituationroom2", "title": "Interview with Wolf Blitzer of CNN's The Situation Room", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-wolf-blitzer-cnns-the-situation-room-2", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3146, "text": "I will go straight to questions as I have no announcements. I am sure you saw just a few minutes ago that the Senate voted for the filibuster on gun legislation. Well, as you saw on the President's statement yesterday and as you have seen all week from the President and the rest of us, we have been encouraged by bipartisan progress on this very important package of proposals. This was simply -- while very important -- a first stage in an effort to get sensible, common-sense legislation that would reduce gun violence in America while protecting Americans' Second Amendment rights signed into law. But we certainly welcome this development. And now that everybody has their cards out on the table in terms of the budget, is there going to be -- do you think that there will be some kind of push for negotiations in the short term on a grand bargain? Or will this kind of linger until this summer when we have to raise the debt ceiling again? Well, the President is interested in reaching a bipartisan compromise built around the principles that are clear in his budget proposal as soon as possible. The House has passed a budget. The Senate has passed a budget. The President has presented a budget. The President has been engaged in a process of having conversations with lawmakers of both parties; in this case, reaching out directly to Republican lawmakers to find out if they are open to the general principle that we should approach our deficit challenges in a balanced way so that we can protect seniors, secure the middle class, allow our economy to grow, and reduce the deficit in a responsible way. That is the President's approach that is embodied in the budget that he presented yesterday. So whose court is the ball in now? Is it incumbent upon Republicans to -- he said in the Rose Garden yesterday that he wants to see Republicans in the coming days show that they are serious about deficit reduction. So do they have to take some action now to get things going? I would refer you to what the President said. We believe that the President's budget proposal, which incorporates the offer that he made to Speaker Boehner at the end of the year -- which by any definition represents a good faith effort that meets the Republicans at least halfway -- that therefore the Republicans ought to examine that and let the American people know whether or not they are too interested in finding common ground rather than embracing ideological purity.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3147, "text": "I mean, there is only one way to do this in a responsible way that protects the middle class, protects seniors, that makes the necessary investments in our economy that will allow it to grow now and in the future, and that is represented by the President's budget -- a budget that I think you have seen in commentary has been recognized as a compromise proposition. It is an attempt to find common ground so that we can deal with our fiscal challenges on behalf of the whole country and move forward. And the immigration Gang of Eight has agreed that before anybody that is here illegally can be on a path to a green card, that we need to have 100 percent surveillance of our border in Mexico, and I think it is 90 percent apprehension rate, which seems like a pretty high bar to meet. Is that requirement in line with the President's vision for what a real path to citizenship is? Well, the President believes, as he made clear in his blueprint that has been available publicly for a long time now, that there has to be a clear pathway to citizenship available; that comprehensive immigration reform must include both that and must continue the focus that he is placed on border security. I would note that there are a variety of ways to measure improvements and progress when it comes to security. And we can point you to a number of facts, which are that apprehensions are down by nearly 80 percent since 2000 and down 50 percent since 2008. And, at the same time, we have increased boots on the ground along the border to more than 21,000 personnel. That is more than at any time in our history. This is progress that has been broadly recognized by Democrats and Republicans, and demonstrates the President's commitment to border security. When it comes to the actual legislation, we wait for that legislation to be produced, and we will assess it when it is. We absolutely commend the progress that has been made, but the President remains committed to the proposition that the result has to be a bill that can earn bipartisan support as well as his signature. ENTITY, you saw the reaction yesterday, probably from many reporters, on the chained CPI inclusion in the budget. Even one Republican congressman called it an attack on seniors. Is there any concern at the White House that this is something that will make it -- that Republicans will use to avoid the grand bargain and even to hurt Democrats politically? The President's budget represents a compromise.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3148, "text": "The inclusion of entitlement reform, specifically chained CPI and means testing of Medicare, comes at the specific behest and request of Republican leaders, as you know. Back in December of 2012, Speaker of the House Boehner said that he wants to use a new method of calculating benefits for entitlement programs known as chained CPI. Again, a Republican congressionalist is citing another news source, Bloomberg. A Republican congressional aide said that Boehner is pressing harder for the CPI revision than for other entitlement changes. Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader -- this is quoting the Wall Street Journal -- said bipartisan agreement on higher Medicare premiums for the wealthy and increase in the Medicare eligibility age, and slowing cost-of-living increases for Social Security could move both parties closer to a budget deal. And by that, a budget deal he meant and everyone meant in December of last year, a budget deal that would be balanced and include revenues, which obviously was part of the President's approach. Mitch McConnell said again that chained CPI was something that he wanted as part of a broader deal. And cynical attempts to make it otherwise by some represent I think dissonance within the Republican Party, and we have seen plenty of condemnation from conservatives and Republicans of that sort of flagrantly ridiculous and cynical attempt to disown a proposal that emanated from Republican leaders. It is the responsible thing to do to try to find common ground. To find common ground you need to meet the other side halfway. You need to accept you are not going to get everything you want. You need to accept things that the other side wants. The three proposals I mentioned that Republican leaders said they wanted as part of a bipartisan deal that would include revenue as well as entitlement reforms -- of those three, the President has included two in his budget. By definition, two out of three is more than halfway. So the President expects and hopes that members of the common-sense caucus will recognize the common-sense nature of his proposal, how it demonstrates as a seriousness of purpose that should infuse everyone's efforts here in Washington when it comes to addressing our budget challenges, and that we can move forward. This is the spirit in which the President had dinner with a dozen Republican senators last night, the second such dinner in recent weeks. And it is the spirit in which he will approach his conversations with Republicans going forward. Let me throw two other quick issues at you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3149, "text": "Why is the President meeting with CEOs from the banking industry today? And what is the purpose of their meeting? Well, there is a meeting, a roundtable, that is being held with other members of the administration, and that is part of our ongoing engagement with the financial sector and with the business community. As you know, we engage with the business community all the time. I would have to take the question. Not that I am aware of. The President met yesterday with the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross, who today expressed their opposition to the forced feeding of hunger strike inmates in Guantanamo. What reaction did the President give to that opposition in their meeting yesterday? First of all, what I can tell you is that you know our commitment to close Gitmo. It is a commitment shared by the former President, by military leaders, and other Republicans, including Senator McCain. And we continue to be committed to closing that facility in our national security interests. I do not have any specific response to what is happening now, except to say that the President remains committed to closing Gitmo for national security reasons. But is he aware of this hunger strike? Is he following it? The President obviously is updated on a number of issues. I have not had a specific conversation with him about this. In the 2008 campaign, the President, then-candidate Obama, issued a statement saying, I will not touch Social Security. So a number of Democrats are now accusing the President of breaking his word. You just said it was a Republican proposal, so why is a Democratic President issuing a Republican budget? Because he is President of the whole country, and he believes we need to reach a budget compromise that is balanced, that allows the economy to grow, that secures a rising and thriving middle class, and invests in the economy of the future while reducing our deficits in a responsible way. His budget is proof that you can do that; that you do not need to take the path embodied by the House Republican budget, which would dramatically slice investments in education; would block grant Medicaid, cut it dramatically, harming families who have children with disabilities; would voucherize Medicare, shifting costs onto seniors at an average of thousands of dollars per year, all the while giving a massive tax break to wealthy individuals and the most well-connected. But is it getting the nation anywhere closer to a deal? Well, he believes he is because it represents compromise and an attempt to find common ground.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3150, "text": "It is incumbent upon Republicans to do the same -- to, in the spirit of compromise and a desire for progress, to meet the President halfway and to accept that they will not get what they want, that the document they passed in the House is maybe satisfying in an ideological way, but it is not in any way representative of either what the American people broadly support or what could ever become law here in Washington, and that instead, they ought to embrace the idea of balance. But is this who he really is, and progressives are misunderstanding what he truly believes in? The President believes that it is in the overall interest of the nation's economy and middle class that we reach a budget deal of the kind the he presented yesterday. And the reason that is, is because we need to continue to grow the economy and create jobs. That is the best thing we can do for middle-class families and for the people he fights for every day. In order to achieve that deal, he recognizes he will have to make some tough choices and that Democrats will have to accept things that they would not otherwise want to do; but so, too, will Republicans. Republicans who suggest that the only way to move forward in deficit reduction is to put the burden entirely on seniors and the middle class are wrong, and it will not be accepted and it is not an approach that this President will accept. And it is an approach that, by the way, was the center of debate for an entire year in a presidential election and the American people roundly rejected it. He has accepted as part of his offer to the Speaker of the House, which is included in his budget proposal, a compromise position and entitlement reforms that he can accept as part of a broader deal that asks everybody to participate in the effort and that invests in our economy, and secures and enhances the middle class. The cloture was invoked with a pretty strong margin. Does the President have any sense of whether the voices from Newtown, whether public attitudes really did make any impact on the Senate? Did he raise it with the senators last night? And is it premature to think that the NRA's voice in Congress is not as strong as it used to be? I would say a couple of things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3151, "text": "The President has no doubt whatsoever that the voices of the Newtown families and the voices of Americans across the country that were raised this week as part of an effort to urge the Senate to move forward, and not block procedurally the progress on this legislation, had a positive effect and may well have been decisive. The President has said all along, and you heard him in Hartford on Monday, that Congress will do the right thing if the American people speak up, if they raise their voices, if they make their views known. And as he said then, it is not about him; it is about the American people and what the right, common-sense thing is to do when it comes to taking action to reduce gun violence. On the second part, as I said to Josh, this is an important milestone, but it is an early milestone. And there is no question that challenges will continue to be placed in the way of making progress on passing common-sense legislation that would reduce gun violence. But we are obviously very pleased with today's vote. Does the President have real concerns about the assault weapons ban, the size of ammunition clips, as being things that will not be able to move forward? Reinstatement of the assault weapons ban makes eminent sense. Making sure that military-style assault weapons are not available on the streets of the United States is a common-sense approach. It does not infringe upon Americans' Second Amendment rights. Limiting the size of ammunition clips will save lives, and it is not an infringement on the Second Amendment rights of the American people. The President strongly supports Second Amendment rights. So he insists -- as the American people insist, as the families of the victims of Newtown and Tucson and Aurora and Oak Creek and Virginia Tech, and so many other places across the country insist -- that the United States Senate on each of these holds itself to account, that senators vote on these aspects of the legislation, that they do not filibuster or use other procedural measures to avoid being held to account. And if they have to vote no, they should vote no and explain why, rather than hide behind procedure and other parliamentary tricks to obscure what is really happening. On the question that Josh asked about immigration, do you want to state a position on this apparent agreement the Gang of Eight has come up on border security?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3152, "text": "Well, there is an apparent agreement that -- I mean, if you have the bill to show me, I'd be interested to take it with me and bring it back here. But we will await legislation and we will evaluate it when it emerges. We are encouraged by the process. The President's commitment to border security is evident not just in his blueprint, which makes clear that border security -- So you do not want to weigh in one way or the other, whether they should include it or not? Again, border security absolutely must be part of comprehensive immigration. If you have legislation that demonstrates what is in it, I'd be interested in seeing it. They are still working on it. When it emerges, we will evaluate it. What is a take-away from the dinner last night? A different group of senators -- do you think this is something that is gaining momentum? The President feels like it is a worthwhile exercise and it is not just a sort of for-show thing? Well, it is certainly not for show in the President's mind. The President believes that both dinners and all of his engagements with Republicans have been constructive and useful. He is very much of the mind that exploring the possibility of finding common ground is in the interest of the American people and the American economy, and it is in the interest of trying to find bipartisan solutions to a whole range of issues, not just our budget and fiscal challenges -- but immigration reform, reducing gun violence, taking steps to enhance America's energy independence and security, making sure that we continue to invest in education and research and development. So there are a variety of arenas here where the possibility of bipartisan compromise exists. In spite of the polarization that does pertain here in Washington, it is also the case that whether it is on gun violence and the vote that we have talked about that happened today, or on immigration reform, or within the context of at least the discussions that the President has been having, there is at least evidence of the potential for bipartisan cooperation. Did either one of the dinners in of themselves propel what we saw on the Senate floor today on gun control or the progress being made on immigration? I would not presume, on the President's behalf, to suggest that any single meal he had with lawmakers led to a specific result.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3153, "text": "The work that is been done on reducing gun violence in the Senate is to the credit of those who have been engaged in that work on Capitol Hill. We have obviously been engaged with them in that work. The same holds for progress being made on immigration reform. As the President made clear when he talked about it from the beginning after the election, he wanted to see progress emerge from the Senate through the Gang of Eight process because he believed that would produce the best opportunity for bipartisan legislation that reflected his principles and that he could sign. So the credit is widespread, but we should not be assigning credit yet. We are not at the finish line in any of these areas yet. We need to keep pressing so that Congress keeps moving and hopefully produces legislation that the American people will support, that Congress will vote for, and that the President can sign. I want to talk to you about North Korea before I let you go. Has it been the President's intention -- because we have not heard him speak to this issue directly for some weeks -- to not, by staying out of public eye and staying out of this in an audible sense, avoid anything that can be either misinterpreted or just not engaged to suggest to the North Koreans that he is rising to their level? I mean, even analysts who are very accustomed to this cycle of provocation and rhetoric do feel that this looks, sounds, and appears different than other cases. And the average American, they are hearing a lot of things that may unnerve them, and yet they have not heard from the President of the United States. Is he intentionally staying out of this for some strategic communication reason? The President has been directing his national security team to take necessary precautionary measures that will ensure that we can both defend ourself and our allies -- defend ourselves and our allies, defend the homeland. And I think that represents the fact that he is concerned about the stepped-up rhetoric and the provocative behavior by the North Korean regime. It is also the case that what we have seen of late from Pyongyang represents a familiar pattern of behavior. And as you refer to it as cycles, and I think that is an appropriate way to describe it, we have seen this kind of cycle in the past. It is always destabilizing, and it is never in the interest of the North Korean people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3154, "text": "It only serves to further isolate North Korea and to undermine any hope the North Korean regime has of reentering the community of nations and assuring the international community that it intends to abide by the obligations that it has made. So we are taking necessary steps -- But is it in the interest of the President not to talk about it and talk to the country about it? I think the President has made clear through the actions of his administration and this government, through the variety of means that have been reported on and the steps that we have taken, the seriousness with which we take this. It is also important to note, as I said, that we have seen a pattern of -- this is reflective of a pattern of behavior that has been going on for quite some time from North Korea. Is this a top issue with Ban Ki-moon later on today? I believe there will be a number of issues discussed with the United Nations Secretary General. This is certainly one of them. It is an issue that the Security Council took up not very long ago, passing a resolution condemning North Korean behavior and sanctioning North Korea that was unanimous, that included affirmative votes from both the Russians and the Chinese. And we are working with our allies in Seoul and Tokyo, as well as with Moscow and Beijing to try to bring about a change in behavior from the North Koreans, asking especially the Russians and the Chinese to use the influence they have, the unique influence they have with the North Koreans to prevail upon Pyongyang to ratchet down the rhetoric and the behavior, because it is in the interest of every nation in the region that there be stability in the region, and that there ultimately be a Korean Peninsula that is denuclearized. On another topic, Syria, which obviously is likely to come up -- been a lot of reports the last couple days suggesting that the U.S. is increasing its aid to the rebels. Can you be direct with us about how significant you see this increase in aid? And what does it mean? I appreciate the question. The President himself has said that we are constantly reviewing possible options that could help end the violence and accelerate a political transition in Syria. We have provided more than $115 million in nonlethal assistance to the Syrian opposition thus far and have been steadily increasing that assistance to help the opposition become stronger, more cohesive, and more organized.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3155, "text": "And as Secretary Kerry announced in Rome, soon we will be providing food rations and medical kits to both the coalition and to the opposition's supreme military council in order to feed the hungry and tend to the sick and wounded. The President has directed his national security team to identify additional measures to continue increasing nonlethal assistance to assist the operation -- the opposition, rather. So I think that addresses your question. We are on an upward trajectory with our assistance, both humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people and direct assistance --nonlethal assistance -- to the Syrian opposition. And we will continue to step up that assistance. The President has directed his team to identify additional measures that we can take to increase that assistance, and we will have a decision to announce in the future. I do not have an announcement to make today. DNI Clapper was on the Hill today, and in some important testimony he said directly that if Assad falls, he said, it is a tough call whether or not the chemical weapons stockpile can be secured. How worried are you about that? It sounds like a pretty dramatic statement from the DNI. Well, there is no question, as we have stated all along, that the disposition of chemical weapons in Syria is a matter of concern to the United States and our allies and partners -- a matter of great concern obviously to countries in the region. And we have made clear, as the President did I believe from this podium, that the use or proliferation of chemical weapons is a red line as far as he is concerned when it comes to the Syrian regime. I would point you to what Director Clapper said. I will not engage in hypotheticals about the welcomed day when Assad is finally -- or when Syria is finally rid of Assad and what will happen. But you can be sure that the disposition of those weapons will be a matter of focus and concern for this nation, as well as many others. ACLU has released some documents that they obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request with the IRS, where IRS agents claim they can go through people's emails and text messages without a warrant. Is the White House concerned about the IRA making that claim in terms of people's privacy? I would have to take the question. I am not aware of the story or the documents that were obtained, and I would certainly refer you to the IRS as a starting point. Last thing -- and this may be in the same boat on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3156, "text": "There is a German family, came to America in 2008 seeking asylum because they did not like German public schools. The reason why it relates to the White House is they got asylum, it was then overturned, and there is a chance they are going to be deported. And there is a petition at whitehouse.gov, an online petition, and it is gotten over 100,000 signatures saying they want the President to intervene so that this family does not have to go back to Germany. They think the public schools -- they have been home-schooling their kids here in America, and they do not like the German public schools. It is reached over 100,000 signatures. What is the process for reacting to something like that? And are you aware of this specific case? I am not aware of it. I will certainly take the question. We do have a threshold beyond which we respond to We the People= petitions, and if that threshold is crossed, I am sure we will respond. But I do not have a specific comment on this case. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said of North Korea that it is skating very close to a dangerous line. Does the President share that assessment? And has he identified a red line, a line by which North Korea crossing that would be unacceptable? Well, I will not engage in hypotheticals about what red lines there are. It is unacceptable to flagrantly violate your international commitments, as North Korea continues to do. And the result of that behavior has been increasing international consensus around the proposition that North Korea's flagrant violations of its obligations must stop. That has resulted in increased isolation and sanctions. It has resulted in all the range of actions that we have taken in response to the recent series of provocative acts and statements. There is no question that North Korea -- because of its development of a nuclear weapon, because of its violation of its commitments, its development of missile technology -- represents a danger and a threat. And that is why we address it the way that we do. So I think that the words of Secretary Hagel are reflective of the administration's view of this problem. It is why we have taken the actions that we have taken to ensure that we can enhance both the security of both the homeland and our allies. And we will continue to take necessary, prudent measures as the situation demands. Well, I guess getting at it from a different angle, the President has identified a clear red line when it comes to Syria, for example.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3157, "text": "I am not sure what you are asking, because the President identified a clear red line about chemical weapons -- the use of or proliferation of the chemical weapons that the Syrian regime possesses. North Korea is already in flagrant violation of its international obligations. It is engaged in the development of nuclear weapons. It is engaged in development of missile technology that is in contradiction to its commitments. And that is why you see the international response that you have seen. And we will continue to work with our allies in Seoul and Tokyo, as well as with partners in the region and around the world, to attempt to prevail upon North Korea to choose a different path. That path, by the way, is open to North Korea. There is an opportunity for North Korea to give up a path that has resulted in isolation and impoverishment for North Korea, and rather to abide by its obligations and therefore enter the international community or rejoin it, and improve the lot of its people. And we hope that North Korea takes that path. Going back to the budget -- if the budget is a first offer of sorts and the President has already put chained CPI on the table, where does he go in negotiations? Is he willing to offer anything more when it comes to entitlements? It has been asked in the past whether this is a starting point. The President's budget represents a fair-minded, serious offer at trying to find common ground with Republicans. The American people expect and support a balanced approach to deficit reduction. The American people expect their leaders in Washington to protect senior citizens, to protect the middle class. They certainly do not expect or support an approach that would put the burden of deficit reduction on seniors and the middle class. They support investments in education and innovation, in infrastructure that the President has within his budget. They support universal access to pre-K for America's children, because that is good for the children now and it is good for the development of our economy in the future. The President's budget is a common-sense document that represents a sincere attempt to compromise with Republicans on behalf of the whole country. The fact is it is not an la carte menu, as I think Gene Sperling said yesterday in our briefing. When the Republican leadership said during fiscal cliff negotiations that when it came to entitlement reforms, that they wanted the President to go along with chained CPI and means testing of Medicare as part of an agreement that would include revenues, the as part of part is very important.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3158, "text": "That is what the President believes. It has to be not just revenues on the one hand and entitlement reforms on the other, but the whole approach has to be embraced -- a balanced approach that allows for investments so that our economy can grow, that allows for the kind of security for the middle class and seniors that is so essential. And it allows for the guarantee that those programs represent to our seniors to continue into the future. So the Republicans have to decide -- and there are rank-and-file Republicans who believe this already, but Republicans including leadership has to decide whether they want to find compromise or they would rather stick to positions that are at odds with where most of America is, and are certainly at odds with where the President is. Is the President confident he can get his own party on board with this, given the backlash? Does he need to start having dinner with them? The President is confident that -- as he was during the fiscal cliff negotiations, as he was in previous negotiations with the Speaker of the House -- that Democrats will support a bipartisan compromise that ensures that our assistance programs to our seniors are safeguarded, and that that guarantee is provided; that ensure that investments in education are made, and investments in innovation and research and development and infrastructure are made. The budget represents tough choices, there is no question. But it also expects from the other side that they make tough choices. Back to the CEO meeting this morning -- I know ENTITY had asked a question -- but I was wondering, did the President plan to bring up unemployment with the executives, and did he talk up his budget a bit with them? I was not in the meeting. I do not have a readout of it. We have a strategy of engagement with the business sector that is ongoing and this is part of that strategy. I certainly would not be surprised if some of these matters came up. The need to deal with growing the economy and creating jobs is his number-one priority. So I am going to go out on a limb and say that this is something that he would want to talk about. And it is certainly his belief, as you saw embodied in his budget document, that we need to reduce our deficit, but do it in a way that allows our economy to grow and secure the middle class. I will take the question and we will see.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3159, "text": "Just staying with the business meeting for a moment, can you talk about why it is important for the President -- or if the President believes it is important to do this outreach to business? And also, do you think that the outreach in the second term has stepped up or we are seeing more of it than we did in the first term? I think the outreach that we have seen has been ongoing. And our outreach includes not just obviously to business, but to a whole range of sectors of the American economy and a variety of groups with different interests. I think what you have seen from the White House is an engagement with business around the simple proposition that we need to take steps to reform our immigration system because that is good for the economy and good for the middle class. We need to take steps to reduce gun violence, and there are some business leaders who are very much interested in that effort. And we need to take common-sense steps to grow our economy and reduce our deficit, and that is obviously of interest to the business sector. ENTITY, on drone strikes, I wanted to ask you about -- the President has said that the only targets of drone strikes are senior operational leaders of al Qaeda and associated forces whom you know are involved somehow in some plotting of attacks against the U.S. Can you explain why classified U.S. intelligence documents that McClatchy has reviewed suggest otherwise? I, as you would expect, am not going to talk about classified documents that others would have obtained. I can tell you that our strategy in dealing with counterterrorism is to utilize the tools available to us. When it comes to the means with which we do that, the President has addressed it and we have been, as an administration, very transparent through a series of speeches by John Brennan, the Attorney General and by others, as well as comments by the President, about the approach that we take in that effort. But can you explain -- some of the documents suggested that there -- Again, ENTITY, you are not going to get me to comment on classified information. Any legal justification, though, for strikes that suggest you have been working with Pakistan and targeting their insurgents -- Again, I do not have any comment on what you are representing as classified information. Returning to Beyonc and Jay-Z -- Jay-Z released a rap today. I know the other day you said that Treasury was the one that cleared their trip.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3160, "text": "He suggested that he got White House clearance and that he personally spoke with the President. I turned Havana into Atlanta/ Boy from the hood got White House clearance/ Obama said, 'Chill, you gonna get me impeached'/ You do not need this anyway/ Chill with me on the beach. I guess nothing rhymes with Treasury. Because Treasury offers and gives licenses for travel, as you know, and the White House has nothing to do with it. So are you saying that he did not -- the President did not have a conversation with Jay-Z? I am absolutely saying that the White House, from the President on down, had nothing to do with anybody's personal -- anybody's travel to Cuba. That is something that Treasury handles. You cannot rhyme that? The President did not communicate with Jay-Z over this trip. ENTITY, do you have something? Let me read this while I have it, which is in answer -- or part answer about our response to the cloture vote. I wanted to let you know that following the Senate's cloture vote, President Obama spoke by phone with family members of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy who are here in Washington, D.C. to ask Congress to pass common-sense measures to reduce gun violence. The President congratulated the families on this important step forward, noting that the bipartisan progress would not have been possible without their efforts. He reiterated that much work remains, and pledged to continue fighting for the votes they deserve. Just to follow up on Syria, al Qaeda in Iraq released on Monday a statement saying they were joining in Syria some opposition groups. And how can you make sure that the money you are going to provide to some opposition groups are not going to end up in those al Qaeda supporters? Well, we work with the Syrian Opposition Coalition, and we obviously are interested in helping and assisting in their consolidation and organization and their overall efforts -- the opposition in Syria that is committed to democratic principles and that is committed to a brighter and more democratic future for Syria. There is no question, and this is a concern around the region, that extremist elements try to take advantage of, in a variety of areas, including Syria, the kind of upheaval that you have seen in a tragedy like Syria. And that is obviously of concern to us, and we monitor it regularly.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3161, "text": "But we are focused on assisting the opposition, the Syrian Opposition Coalition, and the members of the broader Syrian opposition that are committed to a more democratic future for Syria. And I just have another question related to huge breaking news in France and Europe at this moment. The budget minister of Franois Hollande lied to the people in France about a hidden Swiss account when he was trying to do something about the tax evasion. What is your reaction to that? And what will you say for public officials in terms of probity? Well, I am not aware of that and I will not comment on what seems to be an internal matter in France. So I really do not have a response. I have two questions. One, yesterday, hundreds of minorities from Bangladesh, including Hindus, Buddhists and Christians, were demonstrating outside the White House. What they were saying, a message for the President that it should read that they are being targeted in Bangladesh because of their race and religion and their beliefs. And whenever there is a problem in Bangladesh and minorities are under attack by the extremists and groups. I do not have a specific response to the demonstration. Obviously, the administration and the President support the civil rights of peoples around the world, but I am just not aware of the specific demonstration or the issues in terms of a presidential response. And as far as guns are concerned, yesterday hundreds of Sikhs were at the Indian Embassy celebrating the Vaisakhi, their national holiday. And talking to them, what they are saying that among them were the families of the victims from Oak Creek, Wisconsin. What they are saying is that guns kill -- it does not matter how many rounds, and it should be banned at all completely, because as long as guns are in the wrong hands of the people, there will be -- people will be killed. And that is the message they were telling me to send to the President and to the Congress. The President's approach is one that embraces common-sense measures to reduce gun violence that do not infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of the American people, Second Amendment rights that the President supports. And you have seen that reflected in the legislation that he supports up on Capitol Hill and in the set of proposals that he made and announced together with the Vice President earlier this year. You were asked last week about the series of leaders coming to visit and talk with the President. Can you talk about the importance the President attaches to having President Morsi here?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3162, "text": "Will that happen possibly before the G8? I know you are not going to read out any visit plans. Well, I have no announcements to make beyond -- about visits beyond the ones that we already have announced, and which you made note of, and that is that the President will be hosting his counterparts from the UAE, from Qatar, Jordan and Turkey in Washington over the next several weeks. Syria will certainly be one of them. Our relationship with Egypt is and has been very important, and we continue to engage with the Egyptian government. I just do not have any particular next engagement to announce to you at the presidential level. The information also of the $200 million in aid for Jordan that was announced in Amman, can you take that question and get it to us? Well, I have to take it. I am sure the State Department would be a good place to go for more details about it. Back to the budget, if the President's deficit reduction plan is enacted, how many jobs would be lost under his plan as opposed to sequestration? The President's budget will increase job growth in the United States. It includes, in stark contrast to alternatives, investments that will create jobs. It includes tax cuts targeted to small businesses, for example, who hire veterans or small businesses who increase the size of their payroll, for example. It includes investments in infrastructure that will lead to immediate job creation as well as future economic growth and job creation because of the improvements in our roads, bridges, ports, and airports. So the President's -- it is an excellent question because the President's budget proposal, which contains within it his deficit reduction offer to the Speaker, has to be looked at as a whole because it is the President's number-one priority to take measures that help the economy grow, that help it create jobs, that secure and grow the middle class, and reduce our deficit in a responsible way. And the whole point that he was trying to make, and I think he made very well in the Rose Garden, is that you can do that. You can, if you go about it in a responsible way -- and responsible is certainly not what the sequester represents -- but if you go about deficit reduction in a responsible way, you can do it and also invest in our economy in a way that allows it to grow and create jobs. But do you have a number?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney241", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-241", "publication_date": "11-04-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3163, "text": "ENTITY, let me start by thanking you very much for granting this interview. I wonder if we could start with a little bit of the news of the day. Today you issued a written statement expressing deep regret for the deaths at No Gun Ri. But the word apologize did not appear in that statement. Is there a reason for that, that you drew a distinction between expressing regret and apologizing? Well, for me, now, other than that I told them to try to draw the statement up based on what we actually knew about the facts. And I worked very closely with or our people have with the Government of South Korea. We want to be responsive to the people there. And I hope the statement will be taken well by the people of South Korea as a genuine expression of regret about what happened. On another issue, there is a story now that a Navy pilot may have been shot down and may be held in Iraq. Do you have any information that leads you to believe that there are Americans held POW in Iraq? Well, I think the most I should say about this now is that in this particular case, and in this case only, I reviewed the evidence that we had, and we concluded that we should take him off the killed-in-action list and put him on the missing list, which means, obviously, that we have some information that leads us to believe that he might be alive. What does the United States do about it? Well, now that we have some information, we will begin well, we have already begun working to try to determine whether, in fact, he is alive; if he is, where he is; and how we can get him out. Because, since he was a uniformed service person, he is clearly entitled to be released, and we are going to do everything we can to get him out. If Iraq was holding an American, they could not use it as an issue with the United States unless they let us know they had somebody. Why would they hold somebody and not let us know about it? Would that be to their advantage? That is why we did what we did on the classification. We have enough information that makes us believe that at least he survived his crash, at least that that is a possibility, and that he might be alive. And I thought, in fairness to his family and everyone else involved, based on a review of the information and the Defense Department's recommendation, we should change the status.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3164, "text": "But that is all we know, and I do not want to raise false hopes to either. Along the same lines, do we now know for certain that Usama bin Ladin was behind the attack on the U.S.S. Cole? I cannot say that. I can we do believe he was behind some other attacks on our people and that people affiliated with him have been involved in other attacks. But we are investigating this. We are still running down some of the leads. We are still doing some of the work. I think that we will know, and I think that the United States will take appropriate action. That is, I have absolutely no doubt that President-elect Bush will continue to pursue the investigation and, when the evidence is in, will take appropriate action. And when that happens, I will support him in doing so. And lastly, on a bit of domestic politics, do you think that Senators would have a good reason not to vote for John Ashcroft for Attorney General because he blocked your nomination of Ronnie White? Well, first, I think that it was a terrible mistake by the Senate to do it, to do it on a strict party-line vote, which required them to get some Republicans to change their position, including the other Senator from Missouri, who had introduced Judge White to the Judiciary Committee, and the Senators on the Judiciary Committee who had voted his nomination out positively to the floor. I am going to follow my policy here. You know, I will be an ex-President when this is done, and I do not believe I should be commenting for some period of time on public affairs, plus which my wife is a Senator. She has to vote on it. So I am going to let she can speak for herself, and the other Democrats and Republicans will speak for themselves. I do not think I should say more. I have known Senator Ashcroft a long time. I know he is genuinely very, very conservative, and that is what is in his heart. But I did not think this was about that, and it surprised and profoundly disappointed me. I thought that with just 9 days left, you might speak out with a little more reckless abandon than usual. Look, I need my Miranda warnings when I talk to you guys, you know. I cannot even make a joke in Chicago without having it blown out of proportion. Well, as long as you raised that issue, were you trying to say that you question the legitimacy of George Bush's election?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3165, "text": "I have said clearly that I agree with exactly what Vice President Gore said, that in this country we observe the principle of judicial review. The Supreme Court has ruled, and the rest of us have to accept it. And that confers, in a legal sense, a literal legal sense, that confers legitimacy. But I did not say anything different than I have always said; all the Democrats were disappointed that the votes were not counted. And I was trying to pay a little homage to Bill Daley in his hometown of Chicago, with a lot of his family and friends there, by saying you know, he did, I think, did a very good job running the Vice President's campaign. They did win the popular vote. We were having a good time. Again, let us look back at your 8 years in office, ENTITY. After you were inaugurated in January of 1993, how long do you think it took you to get up to speed as ENTITY? Well, I would say there has there is a different answer to that depending on what the issue the question is. For example, I think that the issues that I talked about today when I reviewed our domestic record on social policy, I think we were ready from day one. I think we were and I think part of that was the fact that I'd been a Governor for a dozen years, that I'd been through a tough economic period, had a clear economic philosophy, had worked on education and welfare reform and crime and the environment. Part of it was the fact that I'd had the opportunity to represent the Governors with the White House and the Congress on many issues. On foreign policy, I think I was up to speed on some things and had to learn a lot on others, and I tried to be a quick study. On the ways of Washington, I think it took us probably, you know, even as much as a year, a year and a half, before we really had a good feel for some of the rather different ways in which the town works and the ways in which what a President does and says communicates itself to the other decisionmakers and to the larger American public in a way that was quite different than had been my experience as Governor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3166, "text": "So I did have a lot to learn about that, and I worked hard at it, and I think it is interesting; I was laughing the other day with Mack McLarty, to illustrate the point we had our roughest political problems in the first 2 years, but if you look back on the last 8 years, some of the most important and, I believe, most fundamentally sound decisions were made in those same 2 years. We passed the first big first we passed the economic plan, which included, among other things, the empowerment zones and the earnedincome tax credit and all the things that got rid of the deficit, as well. And then we passed the family medical law. We passed the Brady law. We passed the crime bill. We passed NAFTA. You know, we did a phenomenal number of things in those first 2 years, substantively. But because of the whole sort of contentious atmosphere, some of the problems that we had with health care and other issues, I think that it was not as successful politically and I say that in the best sense politically, meaning we did not communicate as well to the American people or the other decisionmakers in Washington in a way that people could see exactly what was happening and that we were underway here. So I think it took me longer to get the politics right. I think it took a little while for me to get entirely comfortable with all the foreign policy and national security issues I had to deal with not too long. And I think we were ready on the substance of domestic policy from day one. As we are about to inaugurate a new President, can the American people believe that its new President will be ready for the job on day one, or do we have to give them a period for on-the-job training? Well, I think he is like any new President. I think he has certain strengths and will be ready in some ways, and I do not think any human being can be ready in every way on day one. I think that is why, traditionally, Presidents have had a little bit of a honeymoon to get going. But it is a job, like other jobs, and people of good will who work at it can do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3167, "text": "I think he is obviously got all these people around him who going back to the Ford administration, heavily involving the Reagan and Bush administrations people that have worlds of experience and will help him avoid some of the pitfalls which otherwise might come his way or anybody's way, going into that job. And so I think the dealing with Washington part of it, and through the players in Washington, with the press, I think he will be better prepared on that score than I was. I think on national security, he is got a very, very experienced team, so I think that he will get up to speed there in fairly short order. And on domestic policies, we have different views, and that is where the points of greatest conflict were in the campaign between our two sides. But I think on some things, like education, he is had the opportunity to really work in Texas on, and I think his concern is genuine. And on other things, we will just have to see what happens. I mean, I was a Governor for a dozen years, in good times and bad times. So I think that he will need some time to get kind of just the kind of feel the rhythm of some of these domestic issues, because they were not part of his experience. But I think that the American people should not particularly worry about that because he is got a very experienced team, because he has been a Governor, and because the country is in real good shape right now. And I think he will get right up there to speed on the issues as quickly as possible. I am not too worried about that. As you look back over your years in office, are there things, big things, that you wish you could do over or do differently? If I had it to do again, in the first 2 years I might try to pass welfare reform first, and then do health care. Or I would tell the American people that we had to do the deficit reduction first, and there were only two ways to have universal health coverage. Let me just back up and say, a lot of people believe that if the health care plan had been differently designed or something, it could have passed. The truth is that because of the combined effect of the condition of the economy and the inability to raise taxes, we could have neither an employer mandate or a Government-funded program sufficient to insure 100 percent of health care coverage. It was not in the cards. And I think that is one of the things I talked about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3168, "text": "I mentioned at the end of this speech all the things that have happened this year unheard of in the eighth year of a Presidency for all these things to happen. But I have a much greater sense now of the pace of things and how much you can jam through a system. And so, if I had it to do again, I think I would either try to flip the order and do welfare reform and then health care, or I would go before the American people and say, Look, I know I told you that I wanted 100 percent coverage, and I do, but here is the condition of the budget; here is the condition of the country. I cannot pass either an employer mandate or a tax increase, and you cannot get 100 percent coverage without either one. So we are going to take these five steps now. If I had it to do over again. I think in a policy sense, that was the place where the wheel kind of ran off the tracks and we got a little out of position with the American people, and we took that terrible licking in the '94 campaign. When you leave office at noon on January 20th, are you fearful that as you approach the next stage in your life, that the best part of your life is over? You know, in some ways this is the best part of my life because being ENTITY is the greatest honor any American could have and the greatest job any American could have. But I have given a lot of thought to this. I have enjoyed every phase of my life, from being a little boy to going off to college, to living in England, to being a teacher, to being a young attorney general. There is never been a part of my life in which I have not been absorbed, interested, and found something useful to do. And I think that I owe it to my country and to the people around the world who share the values and concerns I do, to try to be a good citizen-servant for the rest of my life. And if I do it right, it is a whole new challenge trying to figure out, how are you going to organize your life, how are you going to organize your day? I mean, for 27 years, most days since I entered public life, I have just been on a relentless schedule. And I have the opportunity now to kind of reimagine what I want my life to be like.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3169, "text": "I want to do what I can to support Hillary I am thrilled and I am more than thrilled; I am just ecstatic that she won that Senate race, and I am happy for her and happy for the people of New York and help Chelsea as she works her way in her life. So I have some financial support responsibilities. But beyond that, I just want to try to imagine how I can be of the most service in the most effective but appropriate way. Just because I am working until the last day here, which I am definitely doing, does not mean that I do not understand that after noontime on January 20th I am not ENTITY anymore. And I know what I am supposed to do there, too, and I am going to go home to New York and get on with my life. But I do not know exactly how I am going to do it yet, but I have given quite a bit of thought to it. And when you said 4 years ago, as you were campaigning for reelection, that that was your last election ever unless you ran for school board, are you going to stick to that? Yes, I cannot imagine I would run for office again. And you know, if I am fortunate enough to live a long life and I stay healthy, maybe some day, somewhere down the road, somebody will say, Why do not you run for this, that, or the other thing, and I would think about it. I do believe I owe it to myself and to my country to continue to be a servant, a public servant. But I think there are a lot of ways you can do that as a private citizen. This country will never have a shortage of good, gifted people willing to serve in public life. And I think that is something I should leave to others. During your Presidency, sir, you have survived travails that would have sent other politicians either running for cover or killed them, and yet you have survived them. To what do you owe this ability to survive bad situations? Well, I'd say a couple of things. I think, first of all, I had an indomitable mother, and I was raised to believe that every person should live on Churchill's edict, Never quit. And I had a high pain threshold. I remember once I was in an accident in a car in high school, and my jaw hit the steering wheel real hard, and it was the steering wheel that broke, not my jaw. I have a high pain threshold.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3170, "text": "And since modern American politics, certainly for the last 20 years, have been a pretty brutal contact sport, that is important. But I think by far the most important thing is what I talked about here today. I mean, I never thought the political office was primarily about personal attainment or ego or validation or even being thought well of. I always thought it was a job designed to achieve larger purposes for the people you were representing. And that is why I came to New Hampshire to give this speech. Apart from my sentimental attachment to the State, we proved here in '92 that if you have good ideas and they relate to people and their lives and their future, that you can survive personal adversity, because people understood this was about a common, larger endeavor. I never, in the darkest days, I never lost sight of the fact that however many days I had left as ENTITY, every one was a privilege and a pleasure, and I should be working for the people. And I think they sensed that. I think that, more than anything else, answers the question you asked. During your Presidency, sir, were there any security close calls that we did not know about? You remember when the guy shot up the White House with the assault weapon, although you guys were in more danger than me. The bullets were directed toward the press room, but he did not know that. There were periods when I had an unusually large number of threats, but the Secret Service handled them and did well. Are you going to do a farewell address? I am thinking about it. I have tried to as I mentioned today in my speech here, I tried to structure a series of speeches, in one of which I spoke to the larger world when I went to Great Britain and spoke at Warwick University after about the global challenge of the 21st century. Then I made many of the same points at the University of Nebraska at Kearney. And then I made the education speech in Chicago and this speech here today. And I am going home to Arkansas to speak to the Arkansas Legislature, where I spoke on my inaugural the five times I was Governor, and I will talk a little more about substantive domestic issues. So I will have laid out my case for what I hope America will do in the future pretty much by the end of my term in these last few weeks in these speeches. I may do another farewell address just so I can thank the country as a whole and say a few specific things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3171, "text": "But it will be if I do, it would be much briefer and less indepth on the policy stuff. Bum rap or not, sir, you, more than any other President, used polling data during your term in office to guide you. Roosevelt was the first President to be almost obsessive about polls. But I never was controlled by them because I always believed if you were right, you could find a way to change public opinion. Only a fool, I think, ignores research data on a constant basis. You look at research data. But I did I believe that you'd be hard pressed to find any President in the last several decades who is done a larger number of things which were not popular at the moment. And one of the things that I used polls for was to understand how aware the public was of given issues or, if they disagree with me on an issue, what was the most effective argument I could make to try to persuade them. But I did not especially on issues affecting America's future, I never let the polls control me. It passed by one vote, and I knew it was the right thing to do. The decision to help Mexico was opposed 81-15. And let me give you some other things. By contrast, if you took polls in the beginning, it would appear that the public overwhelmingly agreed with me on all the gun safety issues, but there is no question that one of the reasons we lost seats in the Congress in '94 was because of the efforts of the NRA. If you took polls on the health care issue in '94, they all looked to be popular, but it turned out not to be. And the reason for that is but I was not unaware of that; I knew that you have to understand how to read polls. I mean, you could be on a popular issue, but if the people who are against you are more intense than the people who are for you, it will still be a net loss at voting time. So I was never paralyzed by polls. I always saw polls as sort of snapshots of what the American people knew, what they were thinking. And I used them to try to figure out what the best possible arguments I could make were to move the country where I thought we ought to go.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3172, "text": "So I would expect any politician to use polls, but anybody who is imprisoned by a poll will in the end be defeated, because they are not good guideposts; they are pictures of horse races that are in progress. I have got one last question that I think you will find irresistible. In recent days, I have noticed you have accused us in the media of treating you with increasing irrelevancy. I'd like to ask you as you near the end of your Presidency, sir, what do you think of the news media coverage that you have been subjected to? Well, first of all, that is also been in just a good-natured jest. It is true that I am on the way out. I mean, you cannot and so I have had a good time. But actually, you have given me unusually heavy coverage for this late in my term. But that is because we are continuing to do things; we are taking these actions like the environmental actions and the other things. I think, on balance, the coverage has been over an 8-year period, on balance has been intense and fair in the sense that I have always had the chance to put my side out. I think that there are unusual pressures on the media today because there are more competitive outlets, and I think that the net effect of that is that sometimes a herd mentality takes over, and one person gets the story wrong, then everybody gets it wrong. I think that the pressure for market share has aggravated the tendency which already exists, not only in our Capital but in every capital in the world, to elevate politics over policy and discord over working together. So I think that I also think that as the first post-baby-boomer President, and given the fact that I was involved in my youth in the controversies over Vietnam and a lot of other things, I think I became kind of a lightning rod and Hillary did for a lot of things that the system kind of had to work its way through. But I'd be at a poor position to have any profound complaints since I am leaving office with pretty good approval ratings from the American people, and none of that would be possible if it had not been for the media through which I communicated my views and my side of all the controversies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3173, "text": "But I think that I do think it is harder to get stories right, to avoid jumping the gun, to avoid kind of contributing to things that have a lot of heat and may not have much light, given the pressures that all of you are under today. The last point I'd like to make, and I am not pandering to you because you cannot cover me much longer, is but I believe this I think it is a real mistake for people to generalize about the media. Very often there will be a big story in the national news, and ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, and CNN will all cover it differently. So I think that you have to I always had the feeling that you were more interested in policy than a lot of the people that covered me, but I think it is more because you have been here so long. I mean, I think you could not have hung around the way you have and done this if you were not fascinated by politics. But in the end, you'd run dry if you did not also care about what the consequences to the country are. And like I said, you cannot cover me much longer, so I am not pandering to you, but I think on the other hand, if you were here now consider, suppose you were a 30-year-old, or however young you can be, 35-year-old television anchor, and you got the White House assignment, and you wanted to go further in life, and you were going to be judged partly by how hot you were on the screen and what your market share was, and you had to put this story together, and you had an hour to do it, you'd be under a whole different set of pressures, both in your work environment and in your head. So I think that I would that is one thing I would counsel any President to do, is not fight paranoia about the press, and do not generalize about it. I think both I and my wife's alleged aversion to the press has been way overblown. We have always been far more discriminating about the things with which we disagreed and the things with which we agreed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkknollercbsradiodovernewhampshire", "title": "Interview With Mark Knoller of CBS Radio in Dover, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-knoller-cbs-radio-dover-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3177, "text": "I will tell you what. I was nostalgic enough, and then you had to stop at McDonald's on top of it? We did not get much sleep last night. The stage seemed more in the audience than the previous ones we have had, did not it? And they were up for it, that crowd last night. If I remember correctly, in '92 there was still some skepticism in that audience, when you gave your acceptance speech. But you know, the difference between then and now is pretty A lot of these people have been with me for 8 years now, you know. They have a lot of those delegates I have run into several people that tell me they were at the previous conventions, one or the other of them, going in You know, we just all I did in L.A. was run around and try to prepare for the speech. Except I did get to play golf one day, which was quite nice. I played a public course there. It is a public course right near Hillcrest that used to be the site of the L.A. Open. They were very proud of it. They mayor wanted to play on it. The bad thing about it was lots of folks out there. It took a good while to get around, but it was really nice.  There were some things we did not talk and I made a few notes. I do not think we said anything last time about foreign policy. I just thought you might have some questions you wanted to ask. I also thought we did not talk much about environmental policy. And I could not remember whether we talked about AmeriCorps. Did we talk about AmeriCorps? You know how important that is to me. Did you see what Bush said 2 days ago? What did he say? He said he was going to get rid of the 100,000 cops program, and he was going to take another look at AmeriCorps. But so many Republicans have turned around on that. I mean, I thought that the adjustment that you announced in Philadelphia at the voluntarism summit was just the icing on the cake for that program. I think the only reason he would get rid of it is just for personal Did you ever hear the story about John Kasich going to Jeff Canada's program in Harlem? And Kasich saying, God, you know, this is the kind of thing that AmeriCorps should be.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3178, "text": "And Jeff said to him, Every one of those kids in there are AmeriCorps kids. Let me ask about let us go to foreign policy for a minute. In going through this thing, I have now written a mere 31,000 words. Every time you have to make a decision about global economic security during the last 8 years, you make it like that. Mexico, Asia, time and time again, you seem to have a really good sense of what global economic security is about. Well, if you look at it, for one thing, if it is a decision that involves the use of force, almost without exception Haiti being the exception, I guess we have particularly in the Balkans, we thought we had to have first a consensus within NATO and then, if possible, some sanction from the United Nations. It took us a long time to put together that consensus in Bosnia. It took a couple of years. You were saying last time that first, especially Somalia, you had not that you did not have the procedures in place that you later would. I do not feel that way about Bosnia. Bosnia was literally Christopher went to Europe early on. We tried to build a consensus. We finally got the country to, I think, eventually we are proud of what NATO did in Bosnia and proud of the peace process. And ironically, we did not have the kind of delay in Kosovo that I was afraid we'd have. So I think you are going to see this from time to time where, if there is a question on the use of force, whenever possible, the American people will want the United States to act with others. And whenever possible, it would be a good thing if we do and if it is sanctioned by the U.N. or at least if there is a darn good argument that it is covered by a U.N. resolution. And I hope that Somalia will never be used as an excuse for the United States not to be involved in United Nations missions. We are training those soldiers in West Africa now that are going to go into Sierra Leone, which I think is a very good thing. And we have been working, ironically, for several years on the Africa Crisis Response Initiative, trying to generally train soldiers in Africa to be ready to deal with the problems. But what happened in Somalia, as I say, was a special case because you had the Americans were there under U.N. command.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3179, "text": "And I think we learned a lot from Somalia, but I think that we should not overlearn it. That is, we should not refuse to go into another situation with soldiers from other countries. It is just that I think, if it happened again, we would have a much clearer notion of the rules of combat. And before we would have an engagement that could literally have led to several hundred casualties on their side and 18 deaths on our side, we would have much greater involvement in the details of it. I talked to McCain about your foreign policy and other things. He was actually very supportive in a lot of other areas, especially high-tech areas. But the argument that he made on foreign policy is one that you hear from the foreign policy priesthood all the time about your foreign policy. They use words like ad hoc and untidy and that you move from issue to issue and there is not the kind of sustained interest in it. He uses an example they use the example of you calling China our strategic partner, and he says Japan's our strategic partner. What do you say to the critics who say that you have not had a sustained and coherent foreign policy? Well, I know they say it, but I disagree. A lot of those people did not want us to be involved in the Balkans. A lot of those people did not think we should have gone into Haiti. I think we have had a consistent policy toward China. We have had to do different things in response to developments there. I think we have had a consistent policy toward Russia, and I think that we have had basically if you go back to some of the foreign policy speeches we gave, I think it is obvious that we have tried to meet the new security threats of the 21st century. We have tried very hard to support a united Europe. We have tried very hard to support the development of democracy in Russia and the reduction of the nuclear threat and removal of nuclear weapons from the other states of the former Soviet Union. We have tried to engage with China. We have tried to contain or reverse the North Korean nuclear threat, and we have supported a dialog between the North and the South. And I think the things that we did and the things that we refused to do in North Korea have some bearing on the ultimate decision of Kim Chong-il to engage Kim Dae-jung. We had an unusual and systematic outreach to our neighbors south of our border.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3180, "text": "And I regret that one of the few defeats of my administration legislative defeats that I really regret was the fast-track defeat which sort of slowed up our initiative in building a free-trade area in the Americas, because I think it is important. And the United States has actually paid a price for that as a lot of the South American nations have actually started doing much more business with Europe rather than the United States. But I just frankly do not agree with him. I think that what I think that if they are looking for some simple explanation of the world, a lot of them did not agree with my outreach to Africa. A lot of them did not agree with our designation of the global ENTITY crisis as a national security threat. But I think that I do not know if you were I gave a few remarks kind of ad hoc to the NDI luncheon yesterday. I think that we should see our foreign policy and national security in terms of the traditional alliances and challenges that we have that have not changed, even though the cold war is over, in terms of the new possibilities opened up either by the end of the cold war or the emergence of this sort of global information society and then the new security threats. And I think a lot of the security threats of the 21st century will come not from other nation-states but from the enemies of the nation-states. I think that you will see a convergence of terrorists, narcotraffickers, weapons merchants, and kind of religious and racial nationalists. I think you will see a lot of that. And then I think you will see a convergence of information technology in weaponry which will lead to the miniaturization of seriously dangerous weapons, both conventional and biological and chemical weapons. And I think the likelihood is that sometime in the next 10 years, people will come to think that there will be kind of cross-national threats which will threaten our security as much as one particular other nation. I understand why they are all saying that. But the truth is, a lot of them did not think I was right in Bosnia and Kosovo. They never disagree on the big picture stuff. I talked to Tony Lake, and I read the book that he has coming out in October. And one of the things he posits as a kind of a central principle of your years that was something different was the fact that we were more threatened by the weaknesses of other countries than their strengths. I think the United States can be threatened more by another nation's weakness than by its strength.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3181, "text": "And I used to tell I do not know how many times I have said to our crowd over the last 8 years, when we are dealing with a country that has interests that are in conflict with ours, I would rather have a strong leader of that country than a weak leader, because a strong leader can make an agreement and keep it and is capable of kind of distancing himself from the more destructive elements in the relationship and within their societies. So I believe that. We want to preserve democracy in South America. But you still need to be strong to keep Colombia from collapsing, for example. There needs to be you have to have to have a certain amount of discipline and strength to do what Museveni did in Uganda and reverse the ENTITY rate the infection rate of ENTITY. There has to be a certain amount of strength in the state to rebuild the public health systems which are breaking down all over the world. Laurie Garrett, who wrote The Coming Plague do you remember that book? She is got a new book coming out I have just seen it in galleys about the breakdown of public health systems all over the world, in the states of the former Soviet Union, in developing countries, and speculating what it might mean for us. You have got to have a strong state with some fair measure of strength to deal with the challenges of climate change, for example, a lot of these big questions. So I absolutely agree with that. the continuing agony between India and Pakistan and the centrality of Kashmir to that conflict and that relationship, it would take a pretty strong Government in both countries to really come to grips with the compromises that would be required to make an agreement that would have any shot at all of putting an end to that problem and also putting an end to it as a potential trigger of nuclear exchanges. So, is the story of Camp David II the fact that one country was stronger than the other, and they were not able to make compromise? You do not have to answer it if it is undiplomatic. Well, I think we are using no, because I understand what you mean, but I do not mean it in the same sense you do. There, Israel has land and army coherence; the Palestinian state has existed in the minds of its adherents and implicit in these U.N. resolutions. So in that sense, that is a different kind of strong and weak.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3182, "text": "That is, if you do not have land, an army, and everything, maybe you have to adhere to words and ideas more, and compromise is more difficult. I do not mean it like that. I meant actually but both Arafat and Barak are strong, even though Barak did not have a big margin in the Knesset. No, I was meaning it in the way that you were meaning it. I was wondering whether Arafat's coalition I mean, I have been over there, and I have seen all the various I know how good a politician he is had to be to, you know, to survive. My gut is that if the other three or four of those other people who will take whatever if we can affect a compromise on Jerusalem that other Arab leaders will take, he can make whatever other arrangements he wants to make. But that is different from whether the Colombians can physically recover 30 percent of their land now in the hands of narcotraffickers and terrorists or whether the Russians can actually rebuild their health care system. Whether the Chinese can collect taxes from Guangdong Province? Your fellow journalist Friedman, Tom Friedman, has written a lot of very interesting essays on this whole subject of the weakness of government as opposed to the strength of government threatening freedom and progress. You have written a lot of very interesting pieces on it. I just come in contact with it over and over and over again. So it is something that I am concerned about. He is spent a lot of time in Russia David Remnick. But this had nothing to do with that. It was something that you said in the very end when we were talking last time, when we started talking about the loss of mystery and the fact that the distance between the leader and the public has evaporated during your time as President. And I understand the point that you made. Do you remember that?  I would like to make two points. Number one, I think that it is a good thing if the American people, through television or through journalistic writings, have a better, deeper sense of what a person the Presidency, for example not only what we are doing but why we are doing it and how it fits into the larger scheme of things and how it fits into the pattern of our lives. And you can get enough I think what you get out of the greater exposure and a more consistent pattern of exposure is worth as what you give up in majesty. What you give up in majesty? So I approve of that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3183, "text": "I do not believe that the kind of invasion into public figures' private lives for the stated purpose of exploring their character but for the real purpose of destroying them for some political end is a very good thing. But I think it is unlikely to occur to the extent to which you have seen it in the last 8 years again for a long time. You do not think the Presidency has just changed forever because of that? For one thing, the Democrats do not have anything like the infrastructure or the stomach or the desire to do that that the Republicans do. So there will have to be an actual abuse of power in office in some way that affects the public interest. We do not the guys that make money we have got a lot of rich people to support us. They would not do what Scaife did. They would not waste $7 million going on 15 wild goose chases to try to run somebody down. We are just not that kind of people. We are actually interested in government, and we care more about what we do with power than power. So I think that is part of it. And I think shutting the Independent Counsel law down was part of it. Finally, when it finally was hijacked as basically the private property of the party not in the executive branch, I think its legitimacy was destroyed. So I think, if there ever comes a time again when we really need one, we will get it, the same way we got it back in the seventies. The press and the public will say the only appropriate response is for the Attorney General to name someone or to ask the court to name someone that is clearly independent. Even short of those kind of spectacular, disgraceful, disgusting, awful kind of investigations, the Presidency after you the Presidency exists in people's kitchens. You have been living in our kitchens for the last 8 years. Part of that is television and part of that is my predisposition to work hard in an open fashion. So I do not as I said, I believe the ability to share with the public at large what you are trying to do and why and to take everybody along on the journey is worth the extra exposure in terms of the price you give up. Whatever the value of the mystery is, I think it is worth it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3184, "text": "And I think most future Presidents will attempt to establish a more I do not know; intimate may be the wrong word, but you know what I am trying to say a more sort of closer bond with the American people not just on an emotional level but actually in terms of having them understand what you are trying to do and why. And if you do lots of interviews, if you are real accessful, if you work crowds, if you do townhall meetings, all these things that I did, you run the risk of making mistakes and paying some price and also sort of being demystified. But I think the benefit you get from it, in terms of keeping the energy flowing through a democratic system, is quite great. If you think about it, after the Republicans won the Congress, a lot of people thought we'd never get anything done again. But we got a big bipartisan balanced budget. We got a big bipartisan welfare reform. We got a lot of bipartisan education reforms. An awful lot of public land. I mean, I have been through these budgets line by line over the last 3 or 4 months. I worked with Pete Domenici and I worked together to do this Baca Ranch deal in New Mexico. And we may actually get this whole CARA legislation through where we are really trying to make the right kind of compromises with the Republicans that would, in effect, take the royalties we get from offshore drilling and put it only into environmental preservation, buying land a small part of it for the Federal Government but a lot of it for States and then restoration of coastlines and all that kind of stuff. What do you think the odds are we can pass this CARA legislation? It is up against some tough rightwing filibusters. Is this last round of negotiations going to happen during the next 2 or 3 weeks? No, I mean the budget. Is that in the budget? No, it is a separate it is a stand-alone bill, because it takes a funding stream that is already there and directs it only to basically long-term land preservation and conservation work at the State and local level, primarily, and the Federal level. But the fact that some of these Republicans, including Don Young from Alaska, they are willing to work with us to institutionalize this sort of thing on a permanent basis is, I think, really encouraging. I still believe there is a lot to be said for showing up every day, and you just keep trying to push the rock up the hill.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3185, "text": "Can I say something that might piss you off? And you can even turn that off if you want. You just do not have to answer it. When Lewinski happened, I was more pissed off at my colleagues and at the Republicans than I was at you. I am sitting there, writing this piece, and I go through this whole section of the trench warfare, line-by-line battles that you have won against the Republicans during those 3 or 4 years. And all of a sudden, I get to Lewinski, and I got to say, I got pissed off at you. It does not change the bottom line of the piece I was pissed off at me. I was surprised by my own reaction to that moment because the stuff you had done you did not get any credit for, you were not going to get any credit for. Unless a lot of people read this piece and it changes other people's minds, you would not get credit for it. But it was the stuff that you did for working people. You are probably the best President for the working people in the history of the country. Robert Pear actually wrote a good story the other day about what we had done for the working poor that nobody noticed over 8 years. But I think well, you know, for us to talk about that would require a longer conversation than we have. But I think the interesting thing was, I viewed the way they overreacted to it as sort of like the last as the second step of the kind of purging our national life of the hardcore, rightwing aspects of the Gingrich revolution, which was the Government shutdown. We rolled that back, and then we rolled this back, and then we had this unbelievable congressional election. And I think you see it in the tone and tenor of the Republican campaign this year. Although I told you before, I am not sure their policies have changed very much, but at least in the tone and tenor of it, I think you can see basically a decision within their camp that, Okay, that, you know, we do not have to get beat a third time over this.  that we have realized that my colleagues realize that we went way overboard in '98. But I think it was even before that. I do not think well, sometime we will have more time to talk about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3186, "text": "But I hope that nobody will ever have to undergo what I did from 1991 through 1998 again, or at least, I hope that if it happens, the media will know that it is happened, instead of being so willing to be basically suborned by it and kind of enlisted and all these other things that happened. In fact, if that is one result of it and it changes our politics and makes it a little less hostile and personally destructive, even if the changes last for 10 or 15 years, that would be a very good thing. Let us end on an up. I do not want to end on that note. Well, it is very difficult to say because we did so many things, and one of the things that that I am sitting here with you now. We just left the handoff deal, and I am thinking what I mean, it seems like I just got inaugurated the first time. But I knew, when we won the economic plan, that it would turn the country around economically. I felt that when we passed AmeriCorps we had a chance to create a new citizen ethic in the country, which I thought was important. I loved going to Ireland when we made the peace there. I loved a lot of the things we did in the Middle East meant a lot to me. You know, when we just a lot of things. I feel very strongly that we did the right thing with welfare reform. I think I told you, when I was at the trial lawyers' meeting the other day and I was just shaking hands, I met two women. One had a master's degree, and one had a law degree. They told me they were on welfare when I became President. I went home I say I went home I went back to my political home in New Hampshire earlier this year on the eighth anniversary of my victory in the New Hampshire primary, and I met a woman in the crowd who was a nurse who had gotten some appointment from our administration and was on welfare when I got elected President. I suppose, in a funny way, those personal encounters are the biggest highs I get. There was a guy I do not know if you were out there when I spoke today and introduced Al and I started talking about the HOPE scholarship? There was a guy over to my left that said, Yeah, I got one of those here. He screamed out in the audience. Because I said it would pay for the community college there. I got one.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3187, "text": "You know, I run into people all the time that have taken the family leave law. I met a woman the other day who told me that her sister had taken the family leave law to take care of their mother, and then she had gotten cancer and taken it and now had a clean bill of health. And I think that in some ways, even bigger than all the 100,000 people in the street in Dublin and all of the huge emotional crowd events, when you actually look at somebody who says, here is something you did, and my life is better because of it, that is probably the most rewarding thing of all. Well, it was 9 years ago just about now that it was just you and me and a State trooper in Maine. Maine?  We also got beat in Maine. Jerry Brown won in Maine. I was thinking about that out there today. I was just thinking about the first time I went out with you in Maine. And I remember we were stuck on the tarmac in Boston. You had to catch a plane to Chicago. And I looked at you, and I said, Do you realize a year from today you could be giving your acceptance speech, and you will have a fleet of cars and Secret Service and planes to take you anywhere you want to go? And you looked at me as if to say, you are out of your mind, boy. I have got to figure out after you write this, you ought to talk to me about what you think I ought to do next. I have a couple of ideas. I know a guy, the guy who runs the Ford Foundation in Asia is really interested in funding ways to move new technology and biotechnology to Third World areas. He would give you a bunch of money for your collaborating on that. Well, I am going to spend a lot of time working on that. My guess is that, just from hearing you talk, that is the kind of stuff that floats your boat these days. Yeah, I want to do stuff that keeps my juices running. I do not think you are going to have any problem with that. I am going to have a good time. But I have got to if my wife wins the Senate seat and my daughter stays in school, I have to make a sizeable income. But we have still got to play golf next year. You have got a deal. By the way, I broke 90 for the first time between last interview and this. That meant I screwed up some other holes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorker", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker", "publication_date": "15-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3192, "text": "immigration reform and gun control . You said in your speech in Las Vegas the time is now. Gabby Giffords in a very emotional plea in the Senate hearing today on gun control said now is the time. Can Congress tackle both issues at the same time? And which one will have priority? Well, there is no doubt that Congress can tackle both. We have to get comprehensive immigration reform. It is been too long since we reformed the system. And we are starting to see a bipartisan consensus built around this. So we need to take the opportunity and we need to do it fast. As the Senators do their work, start identifying where there is some differences. We can provide some technical assistance. Will one be easier than the other? Well, my suspicion is we are seeing more bipartisan discussion on the immigration issue, than on the gun issue. But I also think that on the gun issue you are starting to see the gun owners, people who traditionally opposed gun control saying you know what, when 20 of our children are shot by somebody whose disturbed, and when it is that easy to get these high clip magazines that can fire off hundreds of shots in a few minutes, that it is time for us to do a better job on background checks. Both will end up generating some opposition and some strong opposition. But I am generally encouraged that the Senate seems to be having a serious conversation about these issues. You said in your speech that if Congress does not work in a timely manner on immigration reform you will send your own bill. And you will ask them to, in your own words, to vote on it right away. What to you is a timely manner? The Senate is supposed to introduce legislation by March. Well, you know if they can get a piece of legislation debated on the floor by March I think that is a good timeline. Keep in mind that most of these issues we have done work on already. We have a pretty good sense of the work we have already done on border security. We already know what would be required to earn a legal status and citizenship in terms of paying a fine and learning English. And going through background checks and paying back taxes. So a lot of this work has been done. So we have already drafted a bill. How much time do you have your own timeline as to how much you would give them, before you intervene with your own bill?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision-news", "publication_date": "30-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3193, "text": "Yeah, as I said, if they are on a path as they have already said where they want to get a bill done by March, then I think that is a reasonable timeline. I am not going to lay down a particular date because I want to give them a little bit of room to debate. Will we have immigration reform by the end of this year? You can tell our audience si se puede! But I want to remind the audience, because Maria Elena we have had this conversation for many, many years. The only way this is going to get done is if the Republicans continue to work with Democrats in Congress in both chambers in order to get a bill to my desk. I was very pleased to see the Senators from both the Democratic side and the Republican side come together and put forth principles. Now they have got to fill in the details. Look, it is not that we do not know how to do this. It is not that we got technical problems. This is a matter of, as I said in my speech yesterday, us recognizing that comprehensive immigration reform will make our economy stronger. It is true to our traditions. It speaks to our future. It makes sure that young people who are here like the DREAMERs who want to contribute and want to join our military, want to start a business, that they have opportunities. And, you know, if we keep that positive mindset understanding that that is a strength of America that we attract talent from all around the world, then I am confident that we can get it done. Most people believe that the biggest hurdle will be the path to citizenship. You have clearly said that it mustn't be included from the outset. Senator Marco Rubio says that he will not support a bill that does not put border security ahead of citizenship. Is this going to end up being a battle between you and Marco Rubio? Look, we put border security ahead of pathway to citizenship. We have done more on border security in the last four years than we have done in the previous 20. We have seen a drop in terms of illegal crossings of about 80 percent since 2000. We have made enormous strides, put resources in, we have actually done almost everything that Republicans asked to be done several years ago as a condition to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform. Given that that is the case, it is not as if we have not been attentive to border security and we will continue to be attentive to border security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision-news", "publication_date": "30-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3194, "text": "What we do not want to do is to create some vague prospect in the future that somehow comprehensive immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship will happen, you know, maana. We want to make sure that we are very clear that this legislation provides a real pathway. Now that pathway will take some time. That even under our proposal, this is not a situation where overnight suddenly people all find themselves as citizens. They are going to have to earn their way to it. And they are going to have to go to the back of the line. We are going to have to clear out the, you know, existing lines, the backlog that we have in terms of legal immigrants. Because they did it the right way. We should not punish them for not breaking the law. So all those things are going to have to be put in place. But we have to put that in the place at the outset and make sure that people are clear that this pathway is real and not just a fantasy for the future. As you could imagine there are hundreds of questions. The questions that I have gotten on social media since I announced that I would be doing this interview. Millions of people are desperate to hear from you. They want answers. People who voted for you and people who are confident that this year, this time around you will definitely keep your promise. But the most commonly asked question is, for example, one from Jonathan made on Facebook. Under your plan what would happen to those who already have deportation letters. Also, would parents of U.S. born children who have been deported be able to come back under your plan? Well, what I am going to do is allow the Senate to work on these details. I do not want to, you know, fill in all the blanks. Because otherwise I would have gone ahead and put a bill forward. And then sometimes that creates a dynamic in Congress where if I am for it, then maybe some people have to be against it. I think that over the next several weeks, these next several months what we will see is many of these issues will be debated. But the basic principle would be, from my perspective, that somebody who has lived here has been overall a good neighbor has been somebody who is been law abiding other than the fact that they came here illegally. That have put roots down here. That they should have the capacity to earn citizenship. And we will have to make a whole range of decisions about individual cases.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision-news", "publication_date": "30-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3195, "text": "And we will have to create a structure to make sure that that works. And as I said, we have got to make sure that we streamline the process for legal immigration because so much of the illegal immigration process has resulted because it is so difficult for many people to reunify with their families, and so forth. Now I know that you have reduced, this is another concern on Twitter, the number of deportations of non-criminals. However, in 2012 more than 184,000 non-criminals were deported. In the spirit of your push for immigration reform, would you consider a moratorium on deportations of non-criminals? This is not about policy. It is about people. Well, I think it is important to remind everybody that, as I said I think previously, and I am not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I am required to follow the law. And that is what we have done. But what I have also said is, let us make sure that we are applying the law in a way that takes into account people's humanity. That is the reason that we moved forward on deferred action. Within the confines of the law we said, we have some discretion in terms of how we apply this law. The same is true with respect to the kinds of the length of time that people have to spend outside of the country when their spouses are already here for example. So we are making some changes there. With respect to deportations until we get comprehensive immigration reform. That is one of the reasons I think it is so important for us to go ahead and get this action done. And keep in mind that if we are able to say, at the end of this year, or maybe even before the end of the summer, that we have gotten comprehensive immigration reform done, then that then empowers me to deal with many of these issues in a way that I think, to allow the more specific issues that a lot of people I think would like to see resolved. If you had to choose, what would be the concessions that you would be willing to make on immigration reform? And what would be completely unacceptable to you? I think comprehensive immigration reform has to continue and build on the work we have done to strengthen border security. It has to have provisions to strengthen the legal immigration system. And streamline it and make it easier and faster and fairer for people. And it has to have a pathway to citizenship that is real.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision-news", "publication_date": "30-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3196, "text": "And that people can say alright, I now know that if I take these steps I have a chance to stay here with my family, do the right thing, and over time, maybe down the road, be able to earn my right to take that oath and make that pledge as an American citizen. And I think, there are going to be a whole range of other issues involved in this. There are going to be some who are arguing for guest worker programs. There are going to be some issues around agricultural jobs that are very important. There are issues surrounding how do we make sure that employers are, you know, have the data that they need to check to see if somebody has a legal employment status. So there are going to be a whole range of issues and people are going to be on various sides of those issues. Let us let these Senators who have taken it upon themselves to negotiate. We will be in consultation with them. If I see something that I think is wrong, I will let them know. But I do not want to prejudge it, since I have not seen any details from their legislations. Before we run out of time. I have two short questions for you. In putting together your second term in the Cabinet, we noticed that there is less Latinos. Well, first of all, we have not completed the formation of my Cabinet. So I will let people judge it after all my appointments have been made whether or not we have made progress. One of my highest priorities as an administration, particularly in my second term, because now I am thinking about legacy, is to make sure that we are identifying talent from every walk of life, from every ethnic group, so that the next President will see how big a pool there is of talent out there, that can serve and wants to serve in a Presidential administration. So we are going to redouble our efforts to recruit talented and gifted Latinos that come from every walk of life. It comes from academia, it comes from elected officials. It comes from foundations and non-for profits. Maybe some will come from the media. And we want to identify as much talent as possible. And you know, obviously the Latino community is growing faster than just about any other community. And that means that we have got to prepare leadership for the future, not just for today. You mentioned legacy and I will close with this question. You do not have to worry about reelection anymore now. The only thing at stake is your legacy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision-news", "publication_date": "30-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3215, "text": "I have been incommunicado- or perhaps some people would say excommunicado for so long I do not know what has happened; maybe you can give me the news President, would you care to give us a reminiscent thought on eight years ago today? You could say that I, personally, do not feel any different than I have at any time during the eight years. We have a different kind of crisis, a world crisis instead of a domestic crisis, eight years later. In some ways, on a comparable basis for the future of the country, it is probably more serious than the one eight years ago. I think we might let it go at that. President, do you see any cause for concern in the labor situation as affecting the defense projects? Of course that is a question that would take half an hour to answer the kind of question that cannot be answered. It is a little like saying, Have you stopped beating your wife? I got a letter oh, yesterday or the day before from a very worthy citizen in Florida who was frightfully upset because of what he had read. Where he had read it, I am not saying; but anyway it was because of what he had read. We are all horrified by the complete breakdown of defense production because of strikes. In other words, he got it into his head that there was a breakdown in production because of strikes. Now, of course there are a certain number of strikes; and I would hate to give you this as the definitive figure, but I think it is approximately correct that about a quarter of one percent of production has been affected by strikes at any given time A quarter of one percent is what?- one four-hundredth; so you see the gentleman had got an erroneous impression from what he had read, according to his own statement. In other words, somebody had written something I am not saying where that had caused a perfectly worthy citizen to get a false impression, and that is a great pity for our defense effort President, do you think it is justified for the labor unions to charge fees on construction projects on all men, whether or not they are members of unions, for a job? I cannot talk to a general question; give me some specific instances, cases, places; then I will look it up and find out whether the facts are in accordance with the statements; then I will give you an answer after that. Do you want this in a memo? In other words, I cannot talk glittering generalities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconference74", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-74", "publication_date": "04-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3216, "text": "What did you buy at the Peasant's Museum? I bought just a representative sample of the things that were there. What did you think of the reception? I cannot imagine how many people were there, because there were people, when I drove up, in blocks that had been blocked off by the police, who were way back, were not even visible from the stage. Were you surprised by the warmth? Well, I was surprised by the size and intensity of the crowd. I knew that the Romanian people my friend Mr. Moses here keeps me updated, and I knew that they were very friendly toward America. And keep in mind, they really did suffer more in the recent past than any other people under any of the other Communist governments I mean, what they went through here to gain their liberty. You saw behind the stage today the President and I were before the cross there, and that cross marks the place where people were actually killed when they threw off the previous government. So I think that the price they paid is very fresh in their minds. And I do believe if they keep going, they will make it, just like I said. They have just begun in the last year or so, and they have an enormous undertaking with their economy. But if you look at the rich resources and the fact that the people here are very well educated, I'd say they have an excellent chance, a really good chance. Did they express disappointment? Oh, I think of course they were disappointed. But I think they also the leaders have managed this very well, and they talked very frankly to the people and said well, you heard what the President said today. NATO is a part of their larger strategy. And as long as they see that we are all still on the same page with the larger strategy, that we want them integrated into the West, we want their democracy to flourish, we want their economy to do well, and that if they keep going the way they are going, they will certainly be qualified for NATO membership. And everybody 100 percent of us in Madrid agreed that one of the things that we wanted was to have some more membership from the southern flank, because of the problems that are likely to develop in this region in the years ahead. By NATO's test, where is their area needing greatest improvement, the economy? Well, I think for one thing, when a country assumes the responsibilities of membership, you want to be hopefully, would even be helpful because of the extra psychological boost it gives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexchangewithreportersbucharest", "title": "Exchange With Reporters in Bucharest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-with-reporters-bucharest", "publication_date": "11-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3226, "text": "ENTITY, do you understand and accept the reasons and explanations that two Baltic Presidents are not attending the celebrations in Moscow, 9th May? First of all, I can understand the decision by your . These are difficult decisions because they reflect the difficult times. And I honor those decisions. There is a lot of Americans who came- whose families were in the Baltics. And this is a bittersweet moment for them when you think about it. On the one hand, our country helped defeat fascism, and upon the defeat of fascism, they saw their homelands be taken over by a repressive ideology. And so I fully understand and, matter of fact, understood it to the point where I brought it up to President Putin when I saw him in Slovakia and just said, You have got to understand this is going to create some sensitivities among our friends, among America's friends, Estonia and Lithuania and Latvia. The war is over for 60 years, and it is not still over. No, I appreciate that. Look, I think it is time to move beyond fault and focus on the future. Now, that is easy for me to say because I did not have any family members that were repressed or families divided. I did not have to live under the yoke of communism. But I do believe that time will help heal the wounds. People are able to express themselves in the public square. Independent media can come and interview the President in the White House. But I readily understand why it takes time to heal the wounds of the past. Democracy and the human rights situation in Russia is quite worrying. Are you going to discuss this item during your visit to Moscow? First of all, I have got a relationship with that enables me to be able to have a frank discussion. He gave an interesting speech the other day. The press tend to focus on a comment about the Soviet times, and of course, that obviously riled emotions in the Baltics. I understand that. But he also went on to talk about democracy. I thought it was interesting that he spent a lot of time on his big speech to the nation on democracy. I believe Russia's interest lie to her west. I believe that Russia, by embracing the values that we share, will be able to deal with the many problems that she has. Russia has got enormous problems. And I will do so in a cooperative way, in a cooperative spirit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithestoniantelevision", "title": "Interview With Estonian Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-estonian-television", "publication_date": "04-05-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3227, "text": "I think you would want your friend the United States to be in a position where I can go in and have a constructive, direct dialog. And I think one people have learned about me is I am a pretty direct person. I say what is on my mind; I try to do so diplomatically. And I do so for the interests of the United States and for our friends and for the world. ENTITY, I cannot let you go from here without a question of terrorism. Latest surveys show that the numbers of terrorism are increasing, not decreasing. You have made a lot of efforts. If we were not trying to find the enemy and bring them to justice, the world would look relatively peaceful. But we are on the offense. And so when you engage the enemy, when you try to bring them to justice, they do not like to be brought to justice. I have always told the American people here, It is best to find them where they try to hide so that we do not have to deal with them here at home. And so part of the reasons why there is -activity is up is because we are chasing them down. As a matter of fact, today a big news report came out that I would say one of the top Al Qaida leaders, a person very close to , was brought to justice in Pakistan by the Pak Government, with our help, but nevertheless, the Pak Government did the hard work. That is a very important part of defeating the Al Qaida. But no, we will stay on the offense. The best way to defeat terrorism in the long run, though, is by spreading freedom, is by giving people a chance to live in a free society. How long it takes to curb, finally? I cannot give you a timetable. But whatever it takes, so long as I am the President and there is a threat to the United States of America and to our people-you see, a lot of people in Europe, for them, September the 11th was a date, a passing moment. No question they expressed deep sympathy, for which the United States is grateful. But for us, it was a change of attitude. It was a change of foreign policy. And I told the people when I ran for office the second time, I said, If you put me in office, every day I am in office, I will be relentless in chasing down the enemy. And so, for however long it takes. It takes a while for freedom to take hold. I know that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithestoniantelevision", "title": "Interview With Estonian Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-estonian-television", "publication_date": "04-05-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3239, "text": "everything from making sure that we are dismantling ISIL, and not only stabilizing the situation in Iraq, but addressing the foreign fighter issue and countering the narrative of violent extremism that has been turbocharged through the Internet . We had a chance to talk about situations like Ukraine. We also had an opportunity to talk about how we maintain the strongest and most effective military in the world and how we keep faith with our outstanding men and women in uniform. I could not be more confident that Ash Carter is going to do an outstanding job as Secretary of Defense. And he is hitting the ground running, having already spent a lot of time in this administration and in the Pentagon. So I want to thank the Senate for confirming him almost unanimously. And I look forward to working with him in the years to come. I think America will be well served by Mr. Ash Carter. I disagree with the Texas judge's ruling, and the Justice Department will appeal. This is not the first time where a lower court judge has blocked something or attempted to block something that ultimately was shown to be lawful. And I am confident that it is well within my authority and the tradition of the executive branch's prosecutorial discretion to execute this policy, which will help us make our borders safer, will help us go after criminals and those that we do not want in this country, will help people get on the right side of the law and get out of the shadows. And keep in mind that this is something that we necessarily have to make choices about because we have got 11 million people here who we are not all going to deport. Many of them are our neighbors. Many of them are working in our communities. Many of their children are U.S. citizens. And as we saw with the executive action that I took for DREAMers-people who have come here as young children and are American by any other name except for their legal papers, who want to serve this country, oftentimes want to go into the military or start businesses or in other ways contribute-I think the American people overwhelmingly recognize that to pretend like we are going to ship them off is unrealistic and not who we are. So I have also said throughout this process that the only way we are going to get a broken immigration system fully fixed is by Congress acting. And we know that there has been bipartisan support in the past for comprehensive immigration reform. I held off taking these executive actions until we had exhausted all possibilities of getting congressional action done.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithsecretarydefenseashtonbcarterandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-secretary-defense-ashton-b-carter-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "17-02-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3240, "text": "With a new Congress, my hope has been that they now get serious in solving the problem. Instead, what we have had is a series of votes to kick out young people who have grown up here and everybody recognizes are part of our community and threats to defund the Department of Homeland Security, which would make it even harder for us to protect our borders and to keep our people safe. So my strong advice right now to Congress is, if they are seriously concerned about immigration, about our borders, about being able to keep criminals out of this country, then what they should be doing is working together and working with this administration for a comprehensive immigration policy that allows us to continue to be both a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And certainly they need to start funding the Department of Homeland Security so that they can go forward with all the functions that Republicans say they want carried out, including strong border security functions. But with respect to the ruling, we-I disagree with it. I think the law is on our side and history is on our side. And we are going to appeal it. For those who are now wondering whether or not they should apply, we are going to refer those questions to the Department of Homeland Security that is already begun the planning process. And we will be prepared to implement this fully as soon as the legal issues get resolved. Why not wait until the higher court rules on your programs before implementing them? Well, keep in mind, we are not going to disregard this Federal court ruling. The law is the law in this country, and we take things a step at a time. So we are not going to be actually taking applications in until this case is settled. But we are doing the preparatory work because this is a big piece of business and it is important for us to do in order for us to actually secure our borders effectively and allocate limited resources to the most important tasks and functions that the Department of Homeland Security has. We should not be tearing some mom away from her child when the child has been born here and that mom has been living here for the last 10 years, minding her own business and being a important part of the community. We should be focusing on stopping people at the borders, reinforcing our effectiveness there, going after criminals and felons who are in our midst who we can deport, strengthening our systems for legal immigration.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithsecretarydefenseashtonbcarterandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-secretary-defense-ashton-b-carter-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "17-02-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3241, "text": "You have just returned from an unprecedented preelection whirlwind Middle Eastern trip in the name of peace. Following the trip, polls shows your popularity up. Skeptics would say the trip was planned to boost not only popularity but know-how in the area of foreign policy. Well, we worked for 2 years, very hard, on peace in the Middle East. I had no control over the timing of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty. Obviously, they made their own decision about when to sign. They asked me to come and witness it, because of the role the United States and our administration played in that. When I was there, I went to visit our troops in the Persian Gulf. I sent them there to counter Saddam Hussein's latest aggression. Clearly, I had no control over that. The American people know it. But the benefits that are coming in foreign policy, the nuclear agreement with North Korea, the work in the Middle East, the success in Haiti, they are the result of 2 years of hard work that happened to coalesce at this time. ENTITY, here in Connecticut and across the country, Republicans are trying to make you the symbol of all that is wrong with Government. The pictures of you appear in many GOP television ads. Do you think this midterm election is really a referendum on you? No, but I think that it is the culmination of 2 years of irresponsible conduct on their part, where they did their best to derail the Government, to put the brakes on everything, to oppose deficit reduction, to oppose our plans for economic recovery, to oppose our plans for things like family and medical leave and the crime bill. As a party, they did their best to wreck everything and then to blame us. But the American people are beginning to see through it. After all, let me put it to you this way. If I were a Republican President and I had followed policies which reduced the deficit, shrunk the Federal Government to its smallest size since President Kennedy was in office, increased the economic prosperity of the country, reduced the nuclear threat, expanded trade, and passed the toughest crime bill in a generation, they would be running me for sainthood. But because I am a Democrat, they are engaged in a great disinformation campaign.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohncraneandannnybergwtnhtelevisionnewhavenconnecticut", "title": "Interview With John Crane and Ann Nyberg of WTNH Television, New Haven, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-crane-and-ann-nyberg-wtnh-television-new-haven-connecticut", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3242, "text": "And they have signed this contract to take this country back to the trickledown economics of the eighties, a decade which, I might add, was pretty rough on the State of Connecticut, along toward the end, with all the exploding deficits and other problems. So, I believe the American people will see through that. I have got a lot of faith in the people of this country to be positive, to be forward looking. And my job is simply to get out and give them the facts, and then they will make the decision. President Clinton, we want to go to the viewers now. As you can imagine, we asked them to give us questions for you; we were having a chance to talk to the President. The first question is from Andrea Wilson of Norwalk. Andrea wants to know, ENTITY, what you are going to do to make deadbeat moms and dads accountable and responsible for supporting their children. I sent in the springtime a welfare reform bill to Congress which, among other things, has a much tougher mechanism of child support enforcement. I think we have to have more automatic requirements, more wage withholding, more respect for these child support orders across State lines. It has simply got to be easy to get the child support payments out there. We have got billions and billions of dollars of unpaid child support. And if we had it paid by people who can afford to pay it, the welfare problem would be much smaller, and it would be a lot easier for people who are struggling to raise their children in dignity, to do it. It comes from a woman named Eva Nay, who wants to know why, if you made jobs one of your administration's top priorities, there are still layoffs and little in the way of job creation in Connecticut? I have got some figures right here; I will check it. The national economy, since I became President, has produced 4.6 million new jobs. Now, the Government did not do all that; most of these jobs are in the private sector. But we created the environment in which the jobs could be created by bringing the deficit down, by expanding trade, by investing more in new technologies. Not every American who wants a job has one, and of course, there is nothing the National Government can do to stop some companies from laying off. What our job is is to create more jobs than are lost, and we are doing that. The unemployment rate in Connecticut has dropped more than one percentage point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohncraneandannnybergwtnhtelevisionnewhavenconnecticut", "title": "Interview With John Crane and Ann Nyberg of WTNH Television, New Haven, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-crane-and-ann-nyberg-wtnh-television-new-haven-connecticut", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3244, "text": "Looking back over the past year, what do you think you did wrong, and what would you have done differently? Well, I think there are always things that you will think you did wrong. But I think, basically, we have continued on the path that we set in 1981. The progress that we have made economically is apparent. It is the first time in many years that we have had a recovery from a recession in which not only is industrial well, let us say just productivity increasing, personal earnings increasing, inflation and unemployment both going down all of these things happening at the same time. This has not happened in a recovery for many, many years, which makes me believe we are on a firm footing and have laid a foundation for a solid recovery. There are things if you say what should we have done differently? In trying to negotiate bipartisan agreements on some of these, you look back and think, well, maybe if we'd worked harder in one direction or another we might have gotten more cooperation in our need to reduce government spending. On the international scene, I think that our continued buildup of our strength has changed international relations a great deal. I do not think without that we would have had the beginning negotiations that we have had with regard to reduction of nuclear weapons, both the INF and the START talks. I think it is due to that. I think we have got a finer relationship than we have had for a long time with our own friends and allies. This is particularly true in the efforts that we have made in Asia, as well as our longtime friends in Europe. But it is a foundation laid for more progress. If I could just but surely was there anything you went back at the end of the day and said, Oh, darn, I really you know that did not work right, we should have done it. Is there any one thing that you can pick out? Oh, well, I probably could get incensed about but this was before 1983, earlier than that going for the tax bill on the assumption that we'd been promised about $3 in reductions in spending for every dollar of tax revenue, and we have never seen the $3 in reduced spending. ENTITY, do you think the new rapprochement between Arafat and Mubarak now opens the way as a breakthrough for the possibility of your peace plan getting moving and Hussein taking part?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3245, "text": "We are optimistic about this because if you look at the relationship there and the two countries or the two peoples that were involved, Mubarak is the head of state of the one country in the Arab world that has gone forward and has a peace treaty with Israel. We are hopeful that the peace process will bring about more Arab nations making their peace with Israel. Obviously, a part of that process depends on a fair and just settlement of the Palestinian question. And Arafat has, in the past, has been one who has refused to recognize Israel's right to exist as a nation. But the fact that earlier, and before this split in the PLO ranks, he had begun to discuss with King Hussein negotiations and participating in those negotiations on behalf of the Palestinians-then that broke down with the split in the Palestinian movement. Now I think that what President Mubarak is doing is talking to him about returning to where he was earlier, making contact with King Hussein, and getting those peace negotiations, our peace proposal, underway again. I really do, because we had believed that a settlement in Lebanon had to precede going further with that. I think enough progress has been made there that we can go forward with the peace movement. Israel has denounced the talks between Arafat and President Mubarak, saying it was a pure violation of the Camp David agreements. Would you respond to that? I can understand their feelings in view of the recent tragedy in Jerusalem, and the group taking credit for that claimed to be a PLO group and all. But at the same time, I think as they look at this a little more clearly, they will see that Mubarak, based on the experience of Egypt and its willingness to go forward for peace, is simply trying to persuade others to change their thinking. There was one point not too long before the peace treaty with Egypt, in which Egypt was as violent in its hostility as perhaps today the elements of the PLO are. So, who is better able to try and bring in another person into the peace process than someone who has made the change that Egypt has made? Do you think Mr. Arafat is still a popular leader among the Palestinians themselves? Well, this is what we need to find out. I cannot believe that that radical group that, under the influence of the Syrians, created all this tragedy around Tripoli and the innocent people that were killed because of the violence of that battle I cannot believe that the millions of Palestinians are going to choose that leadership.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3246, "text": "ENTITY, on a slightly different subject, you mentioned that due to our arms buildup, that brought the Soviets to the negotiating table. And now we have had a breakdown in the arms talks, and there seems to be an increased level of tension. Do you think we are at a confrontation state with the Soviets? And what do you see as the chance of an arms accord in 1984? Well, we are going to keep on with that. They said they would not set a date yet for the resumption of these talks. On INF they just walked out. On the INF talks they just walked out. Yes, but since then there have been statements to the fact that they just are not ready and that they are unwilling at this point to set a date. I believe they will be back, and I believe we are further from a confrontation possibility because of the deterrent capability of the United States and our allies at this point. I think there was a far more unstable condition when we had let our own strength deteriorate to the point that there was a window of vulnerability. And I would like to call your attention to one thing. The SALT talks, actually, were not arms reductions; they were supposed to be setting a ceiling on how many more weapons would be built. But in these negotiations, even though the Soviets were not as forthcoming as we would like to have had them be, they still did make a couple of offers to reduce the number of their weapons. Now, that is the first time they have ever done that in any negotiations, in all these previous 19 attempts. And I think that now that they see that we are determined to maintain our own ability to defend ourselves, and our allies with us are included in that, I think that they have to see that these negotiations are in their interest as well as ours. Do you have any signals that they are actually planning to come back? Or are you just looking at it from your what you see as common sense? I think the things that we have heard. I think that this is, you might say, almost a part of the negotiating process. Their whole principal move over this last year or so has been an effort to stop the deployment of the intermediate-range weapons that were asked for by NATO. And the fact that we are going ahead, this, maybe, could be tied to that as still, you might say, an element of negotiating. But we are going to proceed with the installation of those weapons.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3247, "text": "And you do not think it is 3 minutes to 12, the doomsday clock? Well, maybe the scientists know more about science. And from the standpoint of the power of the weapons, yes, they are more powerful; they are more destructive on both sides than they were before. And maybe looking at it from a scientist's viewpoint, that moves up their doomsday clock. But they are not involved in the diplomatic and political end of this as we are. But, sir, you only have 3 really, 3 minutes now to make a decision on war and peace according to the nuclear scientists. Well, now, Helen, in the Bible were not we told that a long period of time was only a moment or even a second to God? I do not know what their 3 minutes refers to. I know it does not refer to 3 minutes. On their doomsday clock, each minute on that clock is that weeks? But, no, I believe that actually and I can understand their feeling all that they hear and, forgive me, but a lot of the editorial content is that, Oh, there are great tensions. There has been, let us say, more heat in rhetoric. At the time that the rhetoric was being used from both sides, our negotiators were sitting there at the table negotiating. ENTITY, can I come back on the prospects of these talks, these arms talks? There is a lot of concern, especially in Europe, that with the lack of dialog between West and the East, especially as the U.S. is entering an election year if you run for reelection that the Soviets are not likely to help you. How do you see the prospects for some kind of an agreement before the elections? Well, I would hope that the Soviet Union would remember their failure in trying to influence the German election and decide not to go down that road again. But as far as I am concerned, whoever our candidate may be, I do not think any decisions on a subject of this kind should be made on our part, on our side, on the basis of as I said the other night political considerations. We are going to continue to do everything we can to resume and achieve arms reductions, as sizable as we can make them, and ultimately I would hope total elimination of nuclear weapons. They have no real place in a civilized world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3248, "text": "And I have been a little disturbed by the tendency of so many in this country who seem to feel that somehow we are at fault, when they are the ones who left the table without setting a date for return. So, you are not going to make any proposal before Oh, we are in communication. We have not broken off communications. We are not, as we have been portrayed, that the two superpowers are here separated with no contact at all. No, we are in communication with them. And we want to continue these policies that would lead toward reduction of arms and that would lead toward peace. I am prepared to say if the Soviet Government wants peace, there will be no war, because I know for a fact that no other country wants war with the Soviet Union. The ball is really in their court. If they want peace, they can have it. I think the deterrent capability, yes. See, we have a weapon here in the world today, the nuclear weapon, that for the first time in the history of all man's weapons has never resulted in a defensive weapon being created against it. The only thing we have is the knowledge that on both sides the punishment would be more than any nation could afford. If they started it, they would have to be prepared to accept virtually as much punishment as they were administering. And this has kept the peace. I have had some meetings with young people who brought this very subject up, and they are greatly concerned. And I have asked them a question, and I must say they come up with a pretty sound answer. I have said, We are the only ones that have ever used a nuclear weapon in Japan in World War II. Would we have used that weapon if we knew they also had that weapon and could use it back against us? And without fail, every group I have ever said this to has decided that, no, we would never have used the weapon. So, that is the real deterrent to war. Do you think these are sincere moves, or are they propaganda ploys, and do you intend any response to them? I think the situation with them right now is covered by the words of Demosthenes in the Athenian marketplace 2,000 years ago when he said, What man would let another man's words, rather then his deeds, tell him who is at peace and who is at war with him? So, you do not think too much of these gestures then?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3249, "text": "And Ambassador Stone has made it plain to them that all they have to do is reinstitute the principles of their own revolution the things that they promised the people they were going to bring about if their revolution succeeded. And they have not done that. They betrayed their own revolution and created a totalitarian state. Well, if you turn Demosthenes around, might the people in Managua not say, We want to see some deeds from the United States. Well, what hostile deeds have they seen? Well, they think of Grenada, for one.  But those rebel forces are part of their own original revolution the people that, once they succeeded, were ousted because they wanted to institute the democratic policies. But they are being armed by us. Well, we set out after the revolution succeeded and prior to my administration, the previous administration immediately started to come to the financial aid, economic aid, to the Sandinista government until it found out that the Sandinista government was not keeping the promise of its revolution. Now, to invoke Grenada, here again I think the words of the Grenadian people themselves, the Governor General, the people of Grenada, our own people who were there and were rescued have revealed this was not an invasion. This was something in the nature of a commando operation, and it was a rescue mission. And the people of Grenada have made it very plain that they feel they, too, were rescued. And the fact that we have withdrawn our combat troops so precipitously, that some of the Grenadians are a little alarmed that they do not think we should have left yet. ENTITY, have you seen the Pentagon report yet, or do you know anything about it? It has not reached me as yet. Well, I am not going to comment until I see it. Do you have any you do not really have any idea what is in it? No more than I read in the papers. Do you think that a lot of people are going to suffer from it? I just Helen, I just cannot comment until I see it. We have all heard that it in some way criticizes everyone in the chain of command. Do you philosophically, or in any way, feel that that chain of command is-you are at the top of it in this case and you bear some of that responsibility? As Commander in Chief, the operation could not have gone forward without my approval. And so, in that sense, I think the investigation was being very thorough.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3250, "text": "ENTITY, in Lebanon, ENTITY Pertini of Italy today called for a withdrawal of the Italian contingent of the multinational force. Apparently there have been 15 countries who were asked to join that force and who have refused. Are you not concerned that the United States, by siding with Israel, is going to end up alone in Lebanon? I think that there was a not completely thorough statement of our meeting with Prime Minister Shamir. It was portrayed, and many people saw it, as somehow arriving at some new coalition with them, and even the word conspiracy was used by some in there. But, no, there was a reaffirmation by us of what our relationship with Israel has been since 1948. And we discussed this not from any standpoint of Israel and its relationship with Arab countries, in the sense of taking their part in anything of that kind. We are dedicated to the idea of trying, if we can, to act as a friend to both the Arab States and Israel in settling those longtime disputes and bringing about the kind of peace that we find between Egypt and Israel now. I would have wished from the very first for a U.N. force. But what has prevented it? If you look at the UNIFIL force that is presently in the south of Lebanon, it is so bound by restrictions that were imposed in order to get the Soviet Union vote that it literally is helpless to do anything. Well, I could still hope that the Soviet Union now would recognize the value of having a U.N. force in there. And as I say, we would have preferred this from the very first, but it was something that could not be obtained. I was asking, are not you concerned of the growing reluctance of your allies to assume part of the burden in Lebanon? Well, we have been in communication. And I think that they understand better now, because we were just as forthright in talking to Prime Minister Shamir about our intentions in our dealings with the Arab States and the things that we were going to do in linkage with them. All of this aimed at being able if a mediator can be of use in that peace process that we proposed to ensure a fair solution to the problems. We have no plan that we are going to impose. That would be wrong of us to go in and say, Here is the peace plan. And someplace there has to be a balance in there in which one is traded for the other. But that is up to them to negotiate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersdomesticandforeignpolicyissues", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-domestic-and-foreign-policy-issues", "publication_date": "23-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3251, "text": "ENTITY, I think it would be helpful to establish some of the facts, I have a couple broader questions for you. So, number one, yes or no, did the President direct Rod Rosenstein to write this memo on James Comey? No, the President had lost -- again, like I said, he'd lost confidence in Director Comey, and, frankly, he'd been considering letting Director Comey go since the day he was elected. But he did have a conversation with the Deputy Attorney General on Monday, where they had come to him to express their concerns. The President asked they put those concerns and their recommendation in writing, which is the letter that you guys have received. So it is the White House's assertion that Rod Rosenstein decided on his own, after being confirmed, to review Comey's performance? And I think most of America had decided on their own that Director Comey was not the person that should be leading the FBI, as evidenced by the numerous comments that we have seen from Democrat members in the House and Senate, Republican members, members of the FBI, and people across the board. Since we are establishing the facts -- Senator Dianne Feinstein said she was told something different directly from the President. The President said he asked Rosenstein and Sessions to review this. He asked them for their recommendation, based on the conversation that they had on Monday. He asked them to put that recommendation in writing. But they came to him on his own. And again, the President had lost confidence in Comey from the day he was elected. On May 3rd, Sean came out and said that the President had full confidence in his FBI Director? Why did he say that? Look, I think -- again, he is questioned Director Comey's reason for needing to stay at the FBI. He had countless conversations with members from within the FBI. Then why did the President -- -- and that is simply not allowed. And somebody like the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein -- who everybody across the board has unequivocally said, this guy is a man of upstanding character and essentially the gold standard at the Department of Justice -- when you take an action like that, when you go around the chain of command in the Department of Justice, then you have to make steps and take action to make a recommendation to the President. And that is what he did. Does it have to do with the investigation into Russia?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3252, "text": "How do you respond to those criticisms? We will come back to that, I am sure. Until you said from the podium just now that the President lost confidence in him over the last weeks and months, we had thought that this was all Rosenstein's doing. When was it that the President lost confidence in James Comey? I think it is been an erosion of confidence. I think that Director Comey has shown over the last several months and, frankly, the last year, a lot of missteps and mistakes. And certainly I think that, as you have seen from many of the comments from Democrat members, including Senator Schumer, they did not think he should be there, they thought he should be gone. Frankly, I think it is startling that Democrats are not celebrating this since they have been calling for it for so long. Do not forget, and I have another one I need to ask you, too. To follow on that, you said that he made a lot of missteps and mistakes. Back at the end of October, this President was applauding the FBI Director when he reopened the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. So he seemed quite happy with him at that point. Well, I think the President's position. One he was a candidate for President, not the President. Once you take over leading the Department of Justice that is very different than being a candidate in a campaign. As you guys all know, there is a very clear distinction between those two things. I think also having a letter like the one that he received and having that conversation that outlined the basic just atrocities in circumventing the chain of command in the Department of Justice. Any person of legal mind in authority knows what a big deal that is, particularly in the Department of Justice, particularly for somebody like the Deputy Attorney General, who has been part of the Justice Department for 30 years and is such a respected person -- when he saw that, he had to speak up on that action, and I think that was the final catalyst. The President is accused by Democrats of trying to circumvent the Russia investigation by firing Comey; he meets with the Russian Foreign Minister and the Russian Ambassador to the United States. He is accused of being Nixonian; he meets with Richard Nixon's Secretary of State. The timing of all of this, is it just ironic or is this the President poking a finger in his critic's eye?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3253, "text": "Look, these were meetings that have been on the books for a while. I think, frankly, the saddest thing is that the Democrats are trying to politicize and take away from something that the President should be doing. He should be meeting with the Foreign Minister. He should be meeting with people like Kissinger. And for them to try to attack him for doing his job, -- maybe they should spent a little more time doing their jobs, and we would not have all the problems that we do. ENTITY, is not it true that the President had already decided to fire James Comey, and he asked the Justice Department to put together the rationale for that firing? When did he make the decision? He made the decision for -- the final decision to move forward with it was yesterday. But I know that he is been contemplating it for a while. But how do you explain what Dianne Feinstein says, that the President told her that he was concerned with the mess at the FBI and asked the Justice Department to look into it? I cannot speak for Senator Feinstein, but I did speak directly to the President and heard directly from him that he, again, had been considering letting Director Comey go pretty much since the day he took office, but that there was no request by him to have a review at the Department of Justice. But was the reason for the firing what was written by the Deputy Attorney General? Is that why he did it? That was, I think, the final piece that moved the President to make that quick and decisive action yesterday. What did he mean in the letter that he wrote informing Comey that he was being fired -- he said, on three separate occasions Comey had told him that I am not under investigation. What were those three occasions that the FBI Director told the President that he was not under investigation? I am not going to get into the specifics of their conversations, but I can tell you that Director Comey relayed that information to the President. Following up on that, ENTITY, did the President ask Direct Comey whether he was under investigation when they were -- when they had these meetings? Again, I am not going to go into the specifics of their conversations. Is the White House concerned that -- he obviously made a decision to stick that in the letter and to make that public. Are there any concerns that it was inappropriate that they had that type of a conversation?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3254, "text": "How important was the FBI Director's failure to stop the leaks coming out of the FBI to the President? I think that is probably one of the many factors. You cannot deny somebody -- that that was not a problem. And so I think that was just another one of the many reasons that he no longer had the confidence of the President or the rest of the FBI. Can we expect more firings from the Justice Department? Going forward, does the President want the Department of Justice to shut down what he is called a taxpayer-funded charade investigation? He wants them to continue with whatever they see appropriate and sees fit, just the same as he is encouraged the House and Senate committees to continue any ongoing investigations. Look, the bottom line is any investigation that was happening on Monday is still happening today. And, in fact, we encourage them to complete this investigation so we can put it behind us and we can continue to see exactly what we have been saying for nearly a year, there is no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. And we'd love for that to be completed so that we can all move on and focus on the things that, frankly, I think most of Americans are concerned with. Even if they keep on wasting taxpayer money, he wants it to continue? Look, nobody wants to waste taxpayer money. I think the President has made a priority of this. That is another reason we'd love for it to come to completion. But at the same time, I know that you all will not let this go until it does. Let us put it behind us. Let us move on, and let us focus on what we need to do to turn our country around. One, was the White House aware at the time of this decision and announcement that grand jury subpoenas in the case of Michael Flynn had just gone out? Do you know anything about that process? I'd have to refer you to -- And does the White House believe that if these FBI investigations are going to proceed in these allegations of Russian interference, do you support continued funding, and support who to lead that investigation? Who is going to be running that right now? Right now I believe that would fall to the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein. And we are incredibly confident in his abilities, as I believe you can tell by the rest of the Senate, including many Democrats, are as well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3255, "text": "Given the fact that he was confirmed 94 to 6 and had overwhelming praise from both sides of the aisle, I think there is complete confidence in him. And another reason, frankly, for Director Comey to be out of the way so that they can have somebody leading this effort that everybody across the board has respect and confidence in. Nobody wants this to be finished and completed more than us so that we can focus on what we need to do here. ENTITY, the President said -- or excuse me -- Sean Spicer said just a week ago today the President has confidence in the Director. So, again, I am sorry for not understanding this, but what has happened in the last seven days to shake the confidence? Was Sean lying at that point? Or did something happen in the last seven days? Of course, you'd love to add that in. Again, I think one of the big things that took place was the process in the hearing on Wednesday where, again -- not to sound like a broken record, but since you guys keep asking the same questions, I guess it is only fair that I keep giving the same answers -- but you have somebody, the Director of the FBI, who reports to the Deputy Attorney General, going around the chain of command. That is not something that is allowed in the justice system, nor should it be. That, along with the corrections that had to take place over the last, I believe, 48 hours, those are all big problems and another, I think, kind of final piece that pushed the President to make the decision that he did. Does he regret not doing it earlier, like on January 20th or January 21st? No, I believe the President wanted to give Director Comey a chance, but he feels that he made the right decision, certainly. Why did he do as he did it, if I could ask? Why did he have one of his long-time security advisors hand-deliver a letter to the FBI when the FBI Director was, in fact, in Los Angeles? Did not he deserve a phone call or a face-to-face conversation? Why did he decide to do it like that? He followed the proper protocol in that process, which is a handwritten notification. And at the same time, no matter how you fire someone, it is never an easy process, and so he felt like following protocol was the best thing to do. Does he plan to speak to him? I am not aware of that conversation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3256, "text": "Was the President aware that James Comey asked for more resources in the Russia investigation? And did that factor into his decision to get rid of Mr. Comey, the Director? Not that I am aware of, and I think that would be a better question for the Department of Justice. Can I ask a follow-up? On the campaign trail, President Trump frequently said lock her up, and he criticized the Department of Justice for not being harsh enough on Hillary Clinton. He actually praised Director Comey in October for having the guts to reopen the investigation. Why was he moved by a letter that said that Director Comey was, if anything, too harsh on Hillary Clinton? Why does that move the President to fire him? Again, I think you are looking at two very different positions. The President was wearing a different hat at that time. And again, when you go around the chain of command in the Department of Justice, when you, like I said before, throw a stick of dynamite into the Department of Justice, that is a big problem and it is one that cannot be ignored. But he already knew that, did not he, ENTITY? He already knew what Mr. Comey had done. I think that this was -- my understanding is Wednesday was the first time the Director had openly and publicly made that statement and made that clear. The statement today on the President's meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov did not include anything on the reported incidents of violence in Chechnya against people in the LGBT community. Is the reason why that was not included in the readout is because the President is not informed on the issue? Is the reason why that was not included in the readout is because the President is not informed about the reports of anti-gay violence in Chechnya? Look, I mean a lot of times there are parts of the conversation that are not specifically included in a readout. But I am not aware -- I have not had that conversation, so I do not know. I was not part of that meeting, so I cannot speak to every detail. And I'd have to refer you to the readout on the specifics of what I know was discussed. Has the President been briefed on this issue generally? Has the President been briefed on this issue generally? That is something I will have to get back to you on. You said you want the Russia investigation to continue at DOJ.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3257, "text": "Would the White House oppose the appointment of a special prosecutor to continue to look into -- to continue the investigation? You have got a House committee, a Senate committee, and the Department of Justice all working on this. I do not think that there is a necessary need at this point to add that. You have got the Deputy Attorney General, who I would say is about as independent as it comes due to the fact that he has such bipartisan support. What gives you such confidence that the rank and file within the Bureau lost faith in the FBI Director? The vast majority of the Bureau is in favor of Director Comey. The real losers here are 20,000 front-line people in the organization because they lost the only guy working here in the past 15 years who actually cared about them. So what is your response to these rank-and-file FBI agents who disagree with your contention that they lost faith in Director Comey? Look, we have heard from countless members of the FBI that say very different things. In fact, the President will be meeting with Acting Director McCabe later today to discuss that very thing -- the morale at the FBI -- as well as make an offer to go directly to the FBI if he feels that that is necessary and appropriate. And we will certainly provide further information on that meeting for you guys. The organization that represents FBI agents is asking for a voice in the selection process of Mr. Comey's successor. I have not had that conversation, but I know, at this point, it is being run through the Department of Justice. And so I would refer you to them on what that process looks like at this point in time. Who did the President consult before making the final decision to fire James Comey? The President spoke with a number of individuals, but at the end of the day, it was the President's decision. And in between Monday night and Tuesday, when he decided to fire the FBI Director, did he speak again with the Deputy Attorney General or the Attorney General? I know that they spoke on Monday, and I believe the next follow-up was actually in writing. Just to be clear, so is it accurate to pull away from the information that we have that Monday night the President made the final call, said I want this in writing as a recommendation, and then took that recommendation as the evidence that he wanted to provide to fire James Comey?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3258, "text": "My understanding is the decision was actually made on Tuesday, but the first conversation that he had was on Monday, when there was an oral recommendation made, and the President requested that he see that in writing to review it further. You say you want to move on and focus on the thing that Americans care about. So let me ask you about that. You are somewhat halfway home on healthcare. You still have tax reform to do, a spending bill, debt ceiling, and infrastructure. But what happened yesterday, you could argue, just widened the divide and made D.C. politics more toxic. So how do you go about accomplishing all of those things with, now, the heightened political environment that we are in? Frankly, I am surprised that it did create a divide since you have had so many Republicans and Democrats repeatedly calling for Director Comey to be gone. Frankly, I do not think it matters what this President says, you are going to have Democrats come out and fight him every single step of the way. I think that is one of the things that is wrong with Washington, and I think that is one of the reasons that we have got to get back to focusing on those issues and, frankly, draining the swamp a little bit further. Was he surprised by the Democratic backlash? Did he anticipate it, considering some of the past statements? How could he have, considering the fact that most of the people that are declaring war today were the very ones that were begging for Director Comey to be fired? If Hillary Clinton had won the election -- which, thank God, she did not -- but if she had, and she had been in the same position, she would have fired Comey immediately, and the very Democrats that are criticizing the President today would be dancing in the streets celebrating. So it is just the -- I think, the purest form of hypocrisy. One, there is a report in Israel that indicates the President has made a decision not to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Can you confirm that? Has he made a decision on that? The President has not made a decision yet, and is still reviewing that. Also, President Erdogan, in his speech, I think, this morning, warned the President against moving the embassy to Jerusalem. Does that warning and warning from other Arab leaders play into his decision as he is considering this move? I am not going to get into the decision-making process here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3259, "text": "All I can tell you is that he is still reviewing it, and as soon as we have a decision, I know we will be happy to report back to you guys. Two questions, both related to the selection of a successor to Director Comey. When President Carter chose a FBI director, he had a blue ribbon panel advising him. Presidents Clinton and Obama interviewed several candidates. Is the President going to follow this pattern, or does he have some individual in mind at this point? Right now, I know that there are several individuals being considered, and the first step will be determining the acting -- or, excuse me, the interim director. And that is being handled through the Department of Justice, and I would refer you to them for right now. Oh, yeah, I forgot you have got two. I have got two. He does not get a question anymore. Who is had a birthday. Just want to make sure we got that in again. I was going to say it is a fact that the Association of Former FBI Agents and Veterans of the Bureau generally prefer people who have been agents themselves or have a background in the FBI. Only two former agents have been director in the last four decades. Will the President consider current or former agents for the position? I would say that he is not ruling anything out at this point. But again, as of today, the Department of Justice is handling the first step in this process. Should the Attorney General, who has recused himself from the Russia investigation, have any role in the selection of a successor? And given the fact that in his 100-day interviews, the President himself said he had confidence in Director Comey, at this podium the American people were told he had confidence in Director Comey, can people take at face value what the President says about personnel issues like this, or his views on things, if just two weeks later, he is out? Absolutely, you can take full confidence in the words of the President. In terms of whether or not Attorney General Sessions should have a role -- look, the FBI is doing a whole lot more than the Russia investigation. I know everybody in this room and probably most of the media around the world would like to think that is the FBI's sole responsibility, but that is probably one of the smallest things that they have got going on their plate, and the 20,000 employees that work there. And so he should absolutely have a role in seeing who runs that agency and that department.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3260, "text": "Does the President have confidence in the Acting Director? And secondly, you mentioned earlier that you are encouraging the FBI to move on from the investigation. Is it appropriate for the White House to be directing the FBI what to do with any investigation they are currently investigating? I do not think that that was the nature or the intent of my comment, was not to direct the FBI, but I think it is simply -- we are fully compliant with helping this process move along. We'd like to see it completed so that, frankly, all of us can move on and focus on things that Blake listed earlier, like tax reform, like healthcare, like infrastructure. Those are big programs, big priorities for this administration. And, frankly, what we'd like to be the number-one thing that we are talking about here, today, every single day, is not FBI investigations but things that, frankly, affect American voters and American taxpayers every single day. What exactly precipitated the Monday meeting? Was that because of the hearing last week and what he said there? Or did the Monday meeting that the President had with the DOJ officials come out of a longer process of consideration of Comey? The Department of Justice officials were here for other business, not specifically to meet with the President on that. The topic came up, and they asked to speak with the President, and that is how it moved forward. Did the President previously talk to Attorney General Sessions or Deputy Attorney Rosenstein about the possibility of going this way with Comey? Not that I am aware of, no. Did it come up in the discussion process before the confirmation that the President was considering nominating Rosenstein -- did he talk about Comey with Rosenstein then? No, not that I am aware of. The President's statement that he talked to Comey about whether or not he was being investigated raises several questions. Can you talk about why you are not willing to add any more to that about who asked for that and why that was discussed? Who asked for what? About whether or not -- I mean, the President seems to be trying to exonerate himself in this. I mean, can you talk about why you will not add anymore to what that conversation was, how that took place, when it took place -- The three occasions -- could you clarify those three occasions and who initiated? Again, I am not going to get into the specific details. I will check and see if we have follow-up on that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretarysarahsanders", "title": "Donald J. Trump Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-sarah-sanders", "publication_date": "10-05-2017", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Sarah Sanders"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3266, "text": "We wanted to make you are probably very happy today, ENTITY, given the unemployment figures, and we thought bringing you on in this style would be appropriate. You recognize that music, of course? That is what I played on Arsenio. Let us start from the beginning. I have got my lines down. You did it fine. You play my music, and I do your lines. ENTITY, it is a pleasure certainly for us to be able to visit with you here. We were actually broadcasting this program from your Inauguration on the morning of January 20, 1991. We were in the big scaffolding thing that was set up alongside the Capitol building where all the photographers and other broadcasters were. And you waved at us, I think. Now, would you say as you look back on it, nearly 2 years after that day, that you maybe went into the office somewhat naive about the reality of being ENTITY? What do you mean by that? Well, that the magnificence of that moment and the anticipation of the 4 years to follow and, perhaps, 8, how tough it was going to be.  I think to some I think I underestimated a couple of things. First of all, the difficulty of having to manage both a domestic and a foreign policy at the same time when both needed so much change, because we need to be strong at home and strong abroad and fighting for good jobs and strong families and safe streets at home and fighting for greater security and freedom and democracy abroad, that is something I underestimated. The other thing I underestimated was the extreme partisanship of the Republican congressional leadership which we now know from studies is the worst it is been since World War II. No ENTITY ever had to deal with that. Now, notwithstanding that, after the Congress went home, we learned that this was only the third time since World War II when the Congress supported the President more than 80 percent of the time. And so we were able to have a historic reduction in the deficit and to provide a dramatic increase in college loans for middle class people and pass the family leave law and the Brady bill and a dramatic crime bill and immunize the kids in the country who are under 2 by 1996. We did a lot of profoundly important things, but it was an extremely partisan and negative environment. I also underestimated the extent to which the communications in the country would continue to be so combative and negative.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkenminyardandrogerbarkleykabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "Interview With Ken Minyard and Roger Barkley of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ken-minyard-and-roger-barkley-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3267, "text": "And I think that somehow unduly sours the American people when the truth is that, for all of our difficulties, this country's in better shape than it was 21 months ago. We are growing jobs at 5 times the rate of the previous 4 years. We have got over 5 million new jobs in 21 months. I mean, we are moving in the right direction. With those accomplishments and a slew of good economic indicators, it is got to you have got to wonder, I would think, to say, This is we should be in great shape here; my popularity should be at an all-time high, and it is not. Who is the most popular politician these days in California? You emerged on top of all the politicians. Pete Wilson, Governor Wilson, came in second. Well, you know, for one thing, I think if you look at the time in which we live, the combative time in which we live and the frustrations people are going through, it is hard for any incumbent politician to be popular. Secondly, I have taken on a lot of tough issues in a very short period of time. And when you go through fights and you take on a lot of strong interest groups and we had to take on tough interest groups to pass the economic plan, to pass the college loan plan, to pass the Brady bill, to pass the assault weapons ban, to try to deal with the health care issue when you do these things, there is it is also, while you are doing it, it can be very unsettling to people because all the news they get is about the combat, the conflict, the things that are going on. So I knew when I started this course that I had to keep my eye on what America would look like in the 21st century. And I had to be willing to have some ups and downs in popularity to try to solve the long-term problems of the country. I just want the American people to know that I have every day I get up and go to work and do the best I can trying to increase their strength for the future, to give them good jobs and safe streets and strong families and to make us stronger in the world. We are moving in the right direction. And I tell everybody at the White House, it is not our job to worry about our popularity, to worry about what the American people think of us every day. But we have to think of the American people every day.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkenminyardandrogerbarkleykabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "Interview With Ken Minyard and Roger Barkley of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ken-minyard-and-roger-barkley-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3288, "text": "ENTITY, it will be in a few days the anniversary of the D-day. Italy and Europe are grateful to the United States for the liberation from fascism and the nazism. But today, Europe and America are still divided about Iraq. When you go in Europe, there will certainly be some demonstration against you. What is the responsibility of this situation? Yes, look, first of all, we share the same values we being America and Europe. And one of the values we share is the freedom for people to express themselves. So I have no problem with people saying, I disagree. Matter of fact, I think it is a healthy sign, and I think it is positive. We had disagreements about the decision to enforce the U.N. Security Council resolution, but there is common agreement in Europe with America that it is in the world's interest that Iraq be free and peaceful. Today I just talked to the new Prime Minister and had a very good conversation with him. And he said, Thank you for giving us a chance, and thank you for standing with us. And when he said thank you, he was not talking just to me. He was talking to the Italian people and the American people and the Brits and all the people in our coalition that are now helping in Iraq. So I am very upbeat and very as I head over to honor what happened 60 years ago, I think we are now seeing unity to work toward common good today. And I am looking forward to it. Yes, but some Europeans blame you for having kept them out of the decision to go to the war in Iraq. Do you think this is the real reason for present difficulties? Well, first of all, I do not see many difficulties. You mean in Iraq? No, I think you will see in the U.N. there is going to be common agreement. I think we will get a new Security Council resolution. Remember, 1441 at the Security Council, we voted unanimously to say to Saddam Hussein, Disarm, or face serious consequences. Then it became clear he did not disarm and did not disclose, and so we had a debate about the definition of serious consequences. My attitude is, when you say something, you better do it. In other words, the world said, Serious consequences, Mr. Hussein. And so, the United States, along with a lot of other nations, agreed that we must enforce serious consequences. But everybody had a chance to participate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithraitelevisionitaly", "title": "Interview With RAI Television of Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-rai-television-italy", "publication_date": "01-06-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3289, "text": "Everybody had a chance, particularly on the Security Council, to say yes or no. But that is now behind us, and that is what is important for the people of your great country to understand. Now, in terms of Iraq, it is tough. And the reason it is tough is because there are killers in that country who want to stop the march to freedom. The worst thing they fear is free elections, but they are not going to stop us. That is what you have got to understand. We are not going to be intimidated by killers in Iraq or anywhere else, for that matter. Some have said that you never admit to any shortcomings, much less failures. Looking back at the past year, do you have anything to reproach yourself regarding what has gone wrong? Did you make any mistakes? Listen, any time you go to war, circumstances change. And the fundamental question is, were we flexible enough to change with the circumstances? Could we this is all hypothetical, when you think about it. We are changing a country from tyranny to freedom, a country where people were brutalized, tortured, raped, killed, maimed, to a country which is going to govern itself. A lot of things did not happen that we thought might happen, the oil production, for example. We thought that would be blown up, and it would cost the Iraqi citizens a lot of money. We thought that people would go hungry or there would be mass refugees, neither of which happened. Our troops stormed through to Baghdad, and then it caused it enabled some of the Saddam loyalists, some of them, to disperse. In other words, they did not stay and fight. And I and our troops were given the flexibility on the ground to deal with that. Now, I wish the Iraqi people had overwhelmingly said, Thank you for coming. Some said, Let us fight them. But do not you think that now this new government could been seen as a puppet government because there are a lot of elements close to America America gives them money? Well, we look, you are talking about the current Prime Minister. And you bet we supported a group that he headed. We did not support him. We supported his group. Because he wanted to get rid of Sad-dam Hussein, and the reason why he did is not because of America. He wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein because Saddam Hussein killed and tortured his fellow citizens. You remember what Saddam Hussein is like. He had torture rooms.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithraitelevisionitaly", "title": "Interview With RAI Television of Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-rai-television-italy", "publication_date": "01-06-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3290, "text": "I had the other day in the Oval Office seven men whose hands had been cut off by Saddam Hussein. We have shown this picture. Are you happy with this new government in Iraq? The government was picked by the United Nations. Brahimi went under very difficult circumstances and consulted with a lot of people and came up with what appears to be a very diverse government.   One, thank you for taking on a very difficult assignment, thank you for leading; and two, America and our coalition will help you succeed, but it is up to you to succeed. You are in charge, and we will work with you to succeed. How much has the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib damaged the American moral authority and credibility? Obviously, it was a shameful moment when we saw on our TV screens that soldiers took it upon themselves to humiliate Iraqi prisoners, because it does not reflect the nature of the American people or the nature of the men and women in our uniform. And what the world will see is that we will handle this matter in a very transparent way, that there will be rule of law, which is an important part of any democracy. And there will be transparency, which is a second important part of a democracy, and people who have done wrong will be held to account for the world to see. That will stand this process will stand in stark contrast to what would happen under a tyrant. You would never know about the abuses in the first place. And if you did know about the abuses, you certainly would not see any process to correct them. You will visit the Pope as well on June 4th. The Vatican opposed the war and now recommends, look forward and pay more attention to the religious and moral sensitivity of the Iraqi people. What is your opinion about this recommendation? Look, a lot of people did not like the war. I understand that completely, and I do not like war. But I am the guy who has to decide, for our case, whether or not a Saddam Hussein would be a threat to peace, and made a very difficult decision. After having tried all diplomacy, war was the last option.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithraitelevisionitaly", "title": "Interview With RAI Television of Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-rai-television-italy", "publication_date": "01-06-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3291, "text": "Secondly, I will tell the His Holy Father I appreciate his positions he is a great man and that I look forward to working with the Iraqis to put in place the conditions so that human rights prevail, something that did not happen under Sad-dam Hussein, looking forward to the development of a society in which boys and girls can go to schools and not be filled with hateful propaganda but with knowledge. I look forward to working with the health care workers in Iraq so that people can get decent health care. I will assure His Holy Father that we will do everything we can to elevate the human condition so that people can live in peace and freedom and remind him that a free Iraq in the midst of the Middle East will serve as a great moment of change, will serve as an example for others to follow. You see, when the people in the Middle East see that a free society can exist in the Muslim world, they will demand the same thing. And in the long run, the best way to defeat terror is to promote freedom, and that is what we are going to do. If you cannot succeed with the United Nations, do you have a plan B as an exit strategy in Iraq? We will succeed we will succeed with the United Nations. I have talked to most of the leaders on the Security Council. I have talked to the Russians, the Chinese, the Germans, the French, of course the Brits, and I know there is a consensus that we must work together for the good of the Iraqi people. This is not about America. This is about Iraq and the citizens of Iraq who suffered under tyranny for so long. And now we have a chance to work together to promote a free society in a part of the world, by the way, that is desperate for free societies. I have got great faith in the future. And having talked to the new leadership some of the new leadership in Iraq I can tell you they share that same sense of destiny, the same great hope for their people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithraitelevisionitaly", "title": "Interview With RAI Television of Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-rai-television-italy", "publication_date": "01-06-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3292, "text": "You know, I recognize I am on the clock, so let us do it. I saw, ENTITY, a recent Pew Research poll that said, among Republican voters compromise is not a virtue. They value politicians who stick to principles rather than those who compromise. And you will not be surprised to hear that that is what I hear often from my radio listeners. If control of the House changes, as now appears likely, and it is brought about by voters who want to put the brakes on you, how are you going to govern for the next two years? Well, first of all, you know, I think the only poll that matters is going to be on November 2nd. And I still feel confident that it is a very close race in terms of the House. You have got close races all across the country, including in your hometown. And a lot of it is going to depend on turnout. Having said that, there is no doubt that voters across the board, I think, want to see Washington work. They do not want games. They do not want posturing. They do not want business as usual. They want us to focus on them, on jobs, on the economy, on keeping small businesses open. And my expectation is, is that Republicans, should they win additional seats, should they be in a position to hopefully take more responsibility working with us, are going to say to themselves that it is important for us to show some accomplishments over the next couple of years. And I think there is some areas where traditionally we have had bipartisan agreement. I will give you an example -- infrastructure. We should have the best infrastructure in the world. We used to have the best roads, the best airports, the best rail systems. We do not anymore, and it is important for us to, I think, put people back to work right now doing the work that America needs done. And that is the kind of thing that I think we could get bipartisan support. The same is true on potentially reducing our debt and our deficit. Everybody agrees that we have to get control of our deficits. I think us working together, Democrats and Republicans, with a responsible plan that makes sure that we are protecting those core investments like education, that help improve economic growth long term, but also eliminating wasteful spending, is something where we should be able to get some agreement.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishmsnbc", "title": "Interview With Michael Smerconish on MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-msnbc", "publication_date": "27-10-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3293, "text": "Well, I am glad you raised the deficit, ENTITY, because on the subject of the economy, I have been watching, and it seems like the Brits have thrown under the bus one of their own in John Maynard Keynes. And you know, Keynes was THE proponent of deficit spending by government to avoid recession. And what occurs to me, sir, is that while your approach has been an $800 billion stimulus, over there they are raiding the retirement age, they are making 130 billion in spending cuts, and they are eliminating a half million jobs. Which begs this question, why is not that the right approach for us? Well, keep in mind, first of all, that they had a big stimulus program over the course of the last two years. So actually, Britain has taken the same approach that we have, and most countries have taken the same approach, which is that in crisis when you had a complete collapse of the economy and jobs were being shed at a pace of hundreds of thousands a month, that it was very important to make sure that the government was able to provide a backstop and allow businesses to heal and recover. Now, we have done that over the last two years. The question is, what do we do going forward? And our problem has not been as bad as Britain's in terms of debt relative to GDP. Our problem is a long- term structural problem that has to do with the fact that we have got an aging population, we have got a bunch of entitlements that are very expensive and are very popular. People like Social Security, they like Medicare. I think that those are pillars of security for people in the retirement age. And so we have to make sure that those are there for future generations, but we have got to make sure that we make some adjustments so that those programs are in place. And I think that we can responsibly set a pathway where, over the course of several years, we are reducing our deficit without endangering economic growth, without endangering, you know, the core investments that are required to make sure that the American dream continues, and without completely shredding our safety net. In a word, what I hear from listeners on a day- to-day basis is, angst. And you talk about the American dream. I was raised to believe that, of course, if I worked hard and had a good education, I would further those achievements of my folks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishmsnbc", "title": "Interview With Michael Smerconish on MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-msnbc", "publication_date": "27-10-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3294, "text": "What I hear from people is a concern that that is no longer the case. They are fearful that their own children will continue to exceed their own opportunities. Well, look, we have gone through a tough decade. I mean, obviously, we have been focusing mostly on this brutal recession that we have gone through, the worst since the Great Depression. But between 2001 and 2009, middle-class families saw their income go down by 5 percent. During that period, job growth was more sluggish than anytime since World War II. So middle-class families have every right to be frustrated and concerned. And the answer is going to be making sure that we are doing what we have always done best, which is innovate, have a dynamic private sector that is investing in new plants and new equipment and hiring new workers. We have got to have a government that is lean and mean, but also making important investments that foster long-term growth. I already mentioned infrastructure. Making sure that we have got the best education system in the world. We used to be ranked number one in the proportion of college graduates. We now rank 21st and 25th, respectively, in our math and science education. And we have begun addressing them over the last two years. So for example, we took away tens of billions of dollars that were going in the form of unwarranted subsidies to banks, and we have made sure that that money was going into making student loan programs cheaper so that more people have access to college educations. That is going to be critical for our long-term growth. I will say, this is an example of the choice that we confront in this election, because my colleagues on the Republican side right now have said that they want tax cuts for the top 2 percent, the wealthiest Americans. And that would cost $700 billion, and they have no way of paying for it. But part of the way that they are suggesting to pay for it is to potentially cut education by 20 percent. That is not a smart way for us to get our debt and deficits under control. We do not want to undermine those things that help us grow over the long term. But I guess that is the reason why I brought up the British model or the British example, is because what I hear from folks on a day-to-day basis is they want to see some corresponding reduction of federal spending. You know the perception of those that you most need to reach. The perception is that the spending is wildly out of control.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishmsnbc", "title": "Interview With Michael Smerconish on MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-msnbc", "publication_date": "27-10-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3295, "text": "You know, the truth of the matter is, is that the budget that we have set up, where we have proposed freezing non- defense discretionary spending, if we followed that program would mean that non-defense discretionary spending, everything other than defense and security spending, would actually be lower as a percentage of our GDP than any time in 50 years. So we each year have identified billions of dollars in cuts and wasteful spending. And you know, as I said before, part of what we have to recognize is that over the last two years we had a brutal recession and a critical crisis that had to be addressed. And that did increase the deficit. I mean, the fact of the matter is, is that we would have seen hundreds of thousands of teachers laid off, hundreds of thousands of firefighters and police officers laid off. This is not just at the federal level. It is also at the state level. We had to help them because their budgets were getting decimated by the severity of this recession. But having said that that, you know, that was a crisis moment that had to be addressed, what people are actually right about is that we have got to make sure that, moving forward, we are doing so in a responsible way. And the best way for us to do it is to do it with a scalpel, not a machete, and to make sure that the cuts we are making are not eliminating those things that are going to help us grow. One percentage point of additional economic growth next year or the year after actually would do more to close the deficit than anything else that we could do, because it brings in more revenues. So you know, if we could make sure that we are eliminating wasteful programs while at the same time growing the economy, that should be the sweet spot that we are aiming for. ENTITY, why is no one who supported the health-care bill running on it ? Well, I think that you have seen a couple hundred million dollars' worth of negative TV ads that make it very difficult to do so. I mean, the fact of the matter is, is that, you know, there was an awful lot of misinformation about this health-care bill while we were debating it, and that has continued after we have finished debating it and after it is into law. So you know, I recognize that, you know, folks feel barraged by negative information, but let us look specifically at what was in this health-care bill.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishmsnbc", "title": "Interview With Michael Smerconish on MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-msnbc", "publication_date": "27-10-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3296, "text": "You have got us closing the donut hole so that senior citizens are able to get their prescription drugs. We have got young people who are able to stay on their parents' health-care insurance policy until they are 26-years old. We have got young people who can now get health insurance, even if they are got a preexisting condition. We have got basically a patient's bill of rights that says that insurance companies cannot drop you when you get sick, cannot drop you because of some fine print in your insurance policy, cannot impose arbitrary lifetime limits that mean you might be bankrupt, even though you have got health insurance if you have had a serious illness. You know, when you look at the specific provisions of the health- care bill, they are all very popular. And you know, I think that it is going to be very important as these things get online and people are seeing how this provides more choice and more competition for them, gives them more control of their health care, gives them more options, allows them to keep their doctor, I think that a lot of this is going to go away. You have earned more than your fair share of political stripes. Is it, politically speaking, a mistake for the Democrats, who supported the health-care proposal, not to be running on it, to go full bore in support of it out on the campaign trail? My attitude has been that I was sent here to take on hard problems. We took over at a moment where probably the nation was facing the greatest set of challenges at least since World War II. And you know, we should be clear and strong about the steps we took to save this country from a second Great Depression, to make sure that we still had a U.S. auto industry and can produce clean cars for the future, that we made the biggest investment in clean energy in our history so that solar panels and wind turbines are built here in the United States and not somewhere overseas, that we are working to expand exports, that we are improving our education system, that we have got a health-care system that is now on track to provide better quality at a better price. You know, those are things that, you know, I want everybody to know about. There are a lot of folks who are hurting out there. You know, there are families who are losing their homes. There are people who have been looking for a job for a year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishmsnbc", "title": "Interview With Michael Smerconish on MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-msnbc", "publication_date": "27-10-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3298, "text": "ENTITY, you have been getting a lot of criticism from your detractors who say that you have been spending too much time abroad. Have you been spending too much time abroad? How do you respond to them? I responded -- when I go to The Hague on a GATT meeting, trade meeting, the purpose of which is to open up agricultural markets to American products, that that is good for the American farmer. It is good for the American agricultural worker. When I go to the peace conference in Madrid, I happen to think that it is in the national interest to try to help bring peace to that troubled corner of the world. When we stand up against Saddam Hussein's aggression and beat back that, I think it is in the American interest. When I go to the Soviet Union and work with Yeltsin and Gorbachev in turning over that whole system, helping them now move down democracy's road, that is in our pure economic interest. And when I am going to go to Japan, it will be in the same thing. We have got to open up those markets. So, I think there is a frustration on the part of the Democrats, some of them that make these silly charges because they do not put it in the perspective of a global economy. We are in a small world. And thank God we have the exports we have got, or you'd have much tougher economic times right here in this State that is hurting. That is the way I'd respond to it. ENTITY, what is your domestic agenda with election right around the corner? Are there certain things that you want to address more than others? The crime bill, it is been up there, challenged them in March to 100 days to pass, and it has not passed. A transportation bill that is job-concentrated that would help the economy immediately. I challenged them to 100 days. It is now, what, 265 days later or something like that. I want to see us do much better in terms of growth. I happen to believe -- and they dump on me, the Democrats on capital gains -- I think that would stimulate small business and create new businesses and new jobs, and it would make us more competitive abroad. We have got IRA's that would kick off first-home buyers savings. We have got all kinds in growth programs; enterprise zones is another one that I think would help. But we are up against the Democrats in the Congress who want to try to do it their way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveschiffkplrtvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Steve Schiff of KPLR - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-schiff-kplr-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3299, "text": "I think I was elected to do the things I have told you I am trying to do. There seems to be some bickering today between Democrats and Republicans in Washington; some of the Democrats saying that it is going to lead to a tax increase. We just got a breakthrough on that a few minutes ago. And I talked to Bob Dole, Bob Michel, thanked them; thanked Speaker Foley, the leader of the Democrats in the House; Chairman Rostenkowski, the Democratic leader of the Ways and Means because we have come to agreement now in a way that operates within the budget agreement and, thus, will not raise people's taxes. My argument with the unemployment bill that was passed before is they just wanted to bust the budget agreement, just added to the burden for the 94 percent of the people who are working. And so we finally prevailed on this, provided the Senate votes for it. So, I think there is good news there on the economic front, certainly on the front for those who should have been getting these checks long ago. We want to help people that are hurting, whose benefits have run out. But it is ENTITY that has to protect all the people. And that is what I think we have done now. Let us turn to the ENTITY issue. Why do not we have a national ENTITY bill? What would an ENTITY bill do? Well, I do not know, I am asking you. Well, if you are asking me, we are doing a good job on research. We are spending far more per victim on ENTITY research than we are on heart disease or cancer, which are far greater killers. We have got to do more in the education front on ENTITY. When I talked to the researchers at National Institutes of Health, I think they feel that they could use more money, but I do not think they feel a shortage of research funds is what is important. We are trying to speed ENTITY research drugs to market even though some are going to accuse us of getting them there before they have been fully tested. I think maybe we need to do more in terms of education. And that is one reason I'd like to see Magic Johnson on our National ENTITY Commission, if he feels that it is something he is interested in doing. The reason I asked you is because I thought maybe there was some ENTITY bill I am not familiar with. And I think this approach to sensitize people on the health considerations is important.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveschiffkplrtvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Steve Schiff of KPLR - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-schiff-kplr-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3300, "text": "ENTITY is a disease where behavior has a lot to do with whether you get the disease or not, unlike cancer or unlike some of these other diseases. So, maybe we need to do more in the education field here. Well, it just seems that the former Surgeon General, Mr. Koop, did a lot of talking until he was criticized about it -- too much talking about ENTITY. And now Ms. Novello does not seem to be talking too much about it at all. Well, I do not know that that is a fair criticism because I think she is out there discussing it, trying to encourage people to look at it as a major national health problem, trying to dispel some of the myths about ENTITY. I have tried to do that. My wife is wonderful at that. When you hold an ENTITY baby in your arms to show that, look, this is not something that is going to be passed just from casual touching like this. But, look, if you asked me am I happy with my role; can I do more? Of course, I want to try to do more. But it is not a function of money, is the point I am trying to make here, I do not believe. I think it is a function of education, getting people to stop doing things that put their own lives at risk, educate people to that end, and show a certain sense of compassion for the victims of ENTITY. A member of your party is running very strongly down in Louisiana. You really know how to hurt a guy. And you have been quoted as saying that if you lived in Louisiana, you'd vote for Edwin Edwards. I have not felt too happy about the choice; I will be honest with you. But, look, here is a deal where normally ENTITY, or this ENTITY, would not get into a local race of this nature. Normally I'd been in there on the side of a Republican, if it is a Republican versus Democrat. But this one's a matter of conscience. This is a matter of saying to the Nation, in my judgment, we must not condone bigotry, anti-Semitism, racism, the ugliness that is coming out as a result of this man, Duke's, past. And I am sorry I -- what I hope I have not done is to inadvertently let him use this to get sympathy inside the State. But here I have a responsibility in the Nation to say, Look, this is too much.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveschiffkplrtvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Steve Schiff of KPLR - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-schiff-kplr-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3301, "text": "It is nice to hear your voice again. Oh, I am so glad you heard them, sir. I know the budget is the burning issue of the moment. You may have seen a Conrad cartoon; it showed you in caricature, and the caption was Or maybe you'd like Bush back and another $2 trillion debt. How could we avoid that and make the whole economic climate healthier? Well, the first thing we have to do is to gain control over our economic destiny again. The deficit is spinning out of control. It was about $74 billion a year in 1980; it is over $300 billion this year. The debt, as you know, has gone from $1 trillion to $4 trillion. And because of that, the money we ought to be investing has not been there. You can see that very clearly in Los Angeles and southern California when you had all these defense cutbacks. We should have been reinvesting all that money in domestic technologies to put the people back to work here at home in high-speed rail, environmental cleanup, all kinds of other things. But the debt was so big that the money went to pay interest on the debt and into exploding health care costs. So our economic plan is terribly important to the people of the United States and the people of southern California because it begins to give us some control back. Already, the fact that the plan is making progress has brought down long-term interest rates. I know one lady who called you said her husband was in construction. Because we are at 20-year mortgage rates lows, there have been 130,000 new jobs come into this economy in construction in the last 4 months. That is the biggest increase in 9 years. Now, it is going to take a while to reach southern California, because that is one of the most distressed areas of our national economy. So you have got to bring the deficit down. You have got to do it in a way that is fair to the middle class, by making upper income people pay the lion's share of the burden. Over the next 5 years, we still need to spend some money to try to redevelop the businesses, the communities, and retrain the workers that have been hurt so badly by defense cutbacks. So this is a good plan, and it is still the only real plan on the table. A lot of people have criticized it, but it is hard to quarrel with the results of it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaeljacksonkabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Michael Jackson of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-jackson-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3302, "text": "Just the progress of the plan is bringing down long-term interest rates. We have got three-quarters of a million new jobs in the economy since January 20th, and I am encouraged. We have got a long, long way to go, and we are dealing with some economic trends that have been in place for 20 years in the world economy. But we can turn it around if we will do so with discipline and if we will stop the delay, if we will go forward now and pass the plan. ENTITY, you mentioned critics. Congressman Henry Hyde, speaking for the Republicans, claimed over the weekend that the Senate Democrats are going to agree to a tax-and-spend, tax-and-spend program this summer that will result in another version of the biggest tax hike in history. In a nutshell, by year's end, will the rich be taxed considerably more, heavily taxed? By year's end, if the plan passes, upper income taxes will go up, taxes on the upper 6 percent of the American people; two-thirds of the tax burden would be paid for by people with incomes above $200,000. The tax on the middle class, in the form of an energy tax, would be phased in over a 3-year period and would amount to no more than $17 a month for a family of four with an income of $50,000 to $60,000, by the third year of the plan. By contrast, families with incomes of under $30,000 would be held harmless, and there would be an incentive in this tax program, for the first time, for people who work 40 hours a week but have children in the home and are still in poverty. The tax system would actually lift them out of poverty. But the most important thing from my point of view is that there cannot be taxes without an equal amount of spending cuts. People who say there are not spending cuts just have not said it right. And for Mr. Hyde, whom I like a lot, to just get on there and chant their old tax-and-spend line, I mean, you know, that is the same crowd that presided over the last 12 years where we went from a $1 trillion to a $4 trillion debt, increased the national deficit every year, and reduced our investment in the future. I mean, they actually set in motion the policies which you see manifest all around you today in southern California. And I do not see how they have any credibility on this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaeljacksonkabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Michael Jackson of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-jackson-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3303, "text": "They were all designed to increase the deficit by moderating tax increases with no offsetting cuts. We are either going to have to make up our mind whether to do the tough stuff necessary in terms of budget cuts and fair revenue increases to bring this deficit down and get control of our economic future and keep these interest rates down, or we are not. And let me just make one other point. For anybody who has refinanced a home loan or refinanced a business loan or gotten a car loan, a consumer loan, a college loan at lower interest rates, a lot of people are going to in the middle class and even some upper income people are going to save more money on lower interest rates than they are going to pay in higher taxes. We have got to start investment in this economy again. And if we do not , we are going to be in real trouble. You had someone call from Orange County; I see what is happened to real estate in Orange County. our proposal contains significant incentives to get the real estate business in California up and going again and throughout the country. There are all kinds of things in this plan which are very, very good for business, that the business community has been asking for for years. But we do ask people who are earning income, who have it and whose taxes went down in the eighties while the deficit went through the roof, to pay a fairer share of the tax burden so we can bring the deficit down. Does Ross Perot concern you? And I pose it that way because of his stand on NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. He really is claiming that this country and particularly this State of California is going to lose hundreds of thousands of jobs that would go to Mexico if the agreement should be ratified. Well, I disagree with him on that issue. There are other issues on which I think we are agreed. We have got a version of the line-item veto in the United States Senate. I very much hope it will pass; I strongly support that. I am pushing for campaign finance reform to reduce the influence of special interests in campaigns, something that he and I both talked about in the last campaign. We have got that out of the Senate; we need to pass it in the House. We are pushing for lobbying reform, something we both talked about last time. We passed a dramatic increase in the requirements for reporting of lobbyists in the Senate. I hope we can pass it in the House.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaeljacksonkabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Michael Jackson of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-jackson-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3304, "text": "But on NAFTA we just disagree. I believe that a country like ours, if we want to generate more jobs, we are going to have to increase the volume of trade. Number one, something you know perhaps better than other Americans, anyone who wants to shut a plant down and go to Mexico today for low wages can do it. And they will be able to do it just as well today or tomorrow as they could after NAFTA is ratified. Number two, as you have seen in California, as long as incomes are very depressed in Mexico, you are going to have a bigger and bigger problem with immigration that goes beyond the legal limits of the law. And what I see happening with NAFTA is a Mexico that can buy more American products, where more Mexicans will want to stay home and be near their families because they will be able to make a living. And Mexico will be the leader of a whole new wave of trading partners for the United States, going down past Mexico into Central America, into Chile, into Venezuela, into Argentina, into other countries. I believe it will create jobs for America. I would not do it if I did not think so. And let me also tell you that there is beginning to be a little bit of a chill in the wind of people who think that they ought to just automatically move their plants to Mexico to save money. There is a big story just in the last day or so about General Motors moving 1,000 jobs back from Mexico to the United States to Michigan, a high-cost State with very productive labor, to produce some of their small cars. So I am very hopeful about this. And let me make one last point. About 4 years ago we had a $5 billion trade deficit with Mexico. Today, because of the trade barriers that Mexico has lowered, we have a $6 billion trade surplus, which means we have created more jobs because of trade with Mexico than we have lost because of jobs moving down there. Now, we do not want to just have a trade agreement with no standards. The Mexican people are going to have to be willing to work with us on environmental standards and on labor standards so we do not just open the floodgates to move jobs to Mexico in ways that will not even raise incomes in Mexico. But if we do it right, it will create jobs for both countries. I mean, Europe is in the worst recession since the 1930's; Japan has been hit, too.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaeljacksonkabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Michael Jackson of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-jackson-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3305, "text": "By contrast, are not things beginning to get better here? Well, they are beginning to get better here, and they are beginning to get better here basically for two reasons. First off, American industry was really battered here during the entire 1980's and in fact starting back in the mid-seventies. And there has been a determined effort by people running our firms in the private sector to become more competitive, so a lot of them are. And that increased productivity, increasing output per worker, the increasing ability to compete with countries around the world, that is helping things to get better. The second thing that is making things better is that this administration's serious effort to bring the deficit down has helped long-term interest rates to get down to their lowest rate in 20 years, and that is leading people to refinance, freeing up some money, and we are getting some more investment. But I do not want to mislead anybody. If you look at southern California, if you look at Connecticut, if you look at some of the States that have been hit especially hard by defense cutbacks of all kinds and other economic problems, we are still going to have to have a very disciplined plan to invest and grow our way out of the problems of the last few years. But yes, we are in better shape now than Europe and Japan. In fact, if we could get some more growth in those countries, we'd be in better shape because we are not selling as much to them as we would be because of their economic problems. They do not have the money to buy American products. And when I go to Japan in a couple of weeks to talk to the leaders of Europe and Japan, one of the things we are going to be talking about is that America is doing what they asked us to do; we are bringing our deficit down. And we want the Europeans to bring their interest rates down and the Japanese to invest some more money in their economy so they can grow it, because they do not have the deficit we do. And if we can work together, we can grow the world economy and that means jobs for America. But you are quite right, we are actually in better shape than Japan and Europe is right now, except for unemployment rates. Japan's still got a lower unemployment rate than we do. Thank you, and again, I want to thank your callers for the thoughts they expressed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaeljacksonkabcradiolosangelescalifornia", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Michael Jackson of KABC Radio, Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-jackson-kabc-radio-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3344, "text": "More than half of Americans have lost confidence in your ability to lead the country and get the job done. That may have been stunning to you? I have been dealing with stuff like this since 2009. How do you turn it around? There have been a number of times where, you know, the punditry said gosh, you know, how do you turn it around. And what we do is staying focused on what matters and chip away at it and try to make progress. People have health care. What I do worry about is that right now we have got a Republican Party that seems to only care about saying no to me. You have got Speaker Boehner talking about suing you for executive actions that he says has crossed the line. He says we elected a president; we did not elect a monarch or a king. Well, you notice that he did not specifically say what exactly he was objecting to. I am not going to apologize for trying to do something while they are doing nothing. But what I have told Speaker Boehner directly is, if you are really concerned about me taking too many executive actions, why do not you try getting something done through Congress. The majority of the American people want to see immigration reform done. We had a bipartisan bill through the Senate, and you are going to squawk if I try to fix some parts of it administratively that are within my authority while you are not doing anything? You mentioned immigration. Do not come; if you come, you will be deported. Actually, we have done that. The problem is is that, under current law, once those kids come across the border, there is a system in which we are supposed to process them, take care of them until we can send them back. Do not send your children unaccompanied on trains or through a bunch of smugglers. That is our direct message to the families in Central America. If they do make it, they will get sent back. More importantly, they may not make it. Let us talk about Iraq. How serious is this ISIS threat to people here in Minnesota, around the country? I was so struck by an article that Ryan Crocker, who served as Iraq ambassador under you, wrote last week. Make no mistake. They have 2,000 fighters with Western passports that do not need a visa to get in. Are we under serious threat right now from ISIS?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsgoodmorningamerica", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News Good Morning America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-good-morning-america", "publication_date": "27-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3345, "text": "You know, I think we have been under serious threat my entire presidency, and we have been under serious threat predating 9/11 from those who embrace this ideology. But they are gaining strength, are not they? Well, they are gaining strength in some places. But we have also got a lot better at protecting ourselves. Let me ask you a final question on foreign policy. It comes from something you wrote back in 2006 in Audacity of Hope. Without a well-articulated strategy that the public supports and the world understands, America will lack legitimacy and ultimately the power it needs to make the word safer than it is today. The majority of Americans do not support your path on foreign policy. Are you failing by your own standard? ENTITY, I not only go back to the polls, but let me just say that throughout the first half of my presidency, polls consistently showed strong support for my foreign policy and -- But the public has to support it, does not it? One of the things we also realized during the course of five years is that, if the problems were easy, somebody else would have solved them already. And one of the great challenges of this job but one of the great privileges of this job is that, you know, you are tackling stuff that is really tough. And I am glad that, after five years, I am still here able to do it. We really only had a couple of shots at the goal. We have advanced from a nonfactor to being a solid middle -- we are a middle-of-the-pack team. But we are now in the mix. You get a sense that it is captured the popular imagination. I was surprised by how much this has broken through. My little girl -- my nine-year-old came up to me and asked to watch the game Sunday, but she does not seem much into TV, but everybody's talking about it. Well, if you think about it, part of it is what is happening with us as parents. You know, even kids who end up being basketball players or whatever, a lot of times their first sport is playing soccer. I will tell you, though, we have to -- there have been elements, which I will not detail, of our foreign policy that have had to be shaped around the World Cup. You know, certain phone calls, certain meetings, initiatives that we might roll out that we have had to think about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsgoodmorningamerica", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News Good Morning America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-good-morning-america", "publication_date": "27-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3346, "text": "Since your party's defeat in the election, you have made two major executive actions - one on immigration, one on Cuba. One of those might have been difficult to do before the election; the other surely would've been difficult to do before the election, which makes me wonder - is there some way in which that election just passed has liberated you? Keep in mind that all these issues are ones that we have been working on for some time. It took about a year to arrive at the Cuba policy that was announced yesterday, including extensive negotiations with the Cuban government, meetings with the Vatican, making sure that we had looked at all the policy ramifications. And I was persuaded that ultimately this would be good for the Cuban people and more likely to lead to a loosening up of the restrictions or oppression that exists there. With respect to immigration reform, obviously I'd been working on that for six years. But this was the moment when you could do those things? Well, I do - here is what I do think is true - that, um, I have spent six years now in this office. We have dealt with the worst economic and financial crisis since the Great Depression. We have dealt with international turmoil that we have not seen in - in a lot of years. And I said at the beginning of this year that 2014 would be a breakthrough year - and it was a bumpy path. But at the end of 2014, I could look back and say we are as well-positioned today as we have been in quite some time economically; that American leadership is more needed around the world than ever before - and that is liberating in the sense that a lot of the work that we have done is now beginning to bear fruit. And it gives me an opportunity then to start focusing on some of the other hard challenges that I did not always have the time or the capacity to get to earlier in my - earlier in my presidency. Can I think of you as shifting from things you had to do to things you more want to do? Think about how much energy was required for us to yank ourselves out of the economic circumstances we were in when I came into office. That was a big lift and it took up a lot of time. Health care, I believed, was profoundly important for the future of the country - a big lift with significant political cost - but we are now seeing that it is paid off.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3347, "text": "Not only have more than 10 million people benefited from the marketplace exchanges that we set up, not only have millions more gotten health coverage through expanded Medicaid in those states that are willing to do it, but we have actually seen health care costs grow at the lowest pace in 50 years, which is part of why we have been able to bring down the deficit by two-thirds. On education, we really wanted to dig in and make sure that we started reforming a system that was not serving our kids well for the competitive 21st century environment. So, these were all big structural shifts that we had to do. I could - I put immigration on that list and was frustrated that we were not able to get legislation. And - and so, the executive action was, in some ways, just a first step in what I hope will be a continuing effort going forward. But it - what is true is that I am in a position now where, with the economy relatively strong, with us having lowered the deficit, with us having strong growth and job growth, for the first time us starting to see wages ticking up, with inflation low, with energy production high - now I have the ability to focus on some long-term projects, including making sure that everybody is benefiting from this growth and not just some. And on the international front, you know, even as we are managing ISIL and trying to roll them back and ultimately defeat them, even as we have been executing the draw down in Afghanistan in a responsible way, the moves like the Cuba diplomatic initiative are ones that I want to make sure I continue to pursue partly because, frankly, a - it is easier for ENTITY to do at the end of his term than a new president coming in. You were able to start Cuba without Congress; able to start on immigration without Congress. Each of those issues cannot be fully resolved without Congress. Is there anything that you personally intend to do differently in your ap-proach to Congress in hopes of getting better results in your final two years than you have on some occasions in the past? I can always do better in every aspect of my job and congressional relations is not exempt from that. I am obviously frustrated with the results of the midterm election. I think we had a great record for members of Congress to run on and I - I do not think we - myself and the Democratic Party made as good of a case as we should have.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3348, "text": "And, you know, as a consequence, we had really low voter turnout and the results were bad. On the other hand, now you have got Republicans in a position where it is not enough for them simply to grind the wheels of Congress to a halt and then blame me. They are going to be in a position in which they have to show that they can responsibly govern, given that they have significant majorities in both chambers. And, you know, what I have said repeatedly is that I want to work with them; I want to get things done. I do not have another election to run. There are going to be areas where we agree and I am going to be as aggressive as I can be in getting legislation passed that I think help move the economy forward and help middle class families. There are going to be some areas where we disagree and, you know, I have not used the veto pen very often since I have been in office, partly because legislation that I objected to was typically blocked in the Senate even after the House took over - Republicans took over the House. Now I suspect there are going to be some times where I have got to pull that pen out. And I am going to defend gains that we have made in health care; I am going to defend gains that we have made on environment and clean air and clean water. But what I am hopeful about, and - and we saw this so far at least in the lame duck - is a recognition by both Speaker Boehner and Mitch McConnell that people are looking to them to get things done and that the fact that we disagree on one thing should not prohibit us from getting - getting progress on the areas where there is some overlap. Well, let me figure out if there is overlap on immigration. In an interview in August, you described the Republican Party as being captive to nativist elements of the party. What did you mean by that and can you work with people who you think of in that way? Well, on immigration, I probably cannot ; I am - Steve King and I fundamentally disagree on immigration. If - if - if your view is that immigrants are either fundamentally bad to the country or that we actually have the option of deporting 11 million immigrants, regardless of the disruptions, regardless of the cost and that that is who we are as Americans, I reject that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3349, "text": "On the other hand, I think that there are a lot of Republicans who recognize that not only do we need to fix a broken immigration system, strengthen our borders and streamline the legal immigration system, but that we have to show realism, practicality and insist on accountability from those who are here illegally and that the best way to do that is to provide them a path to get legal - paying a fine, submitting to background checks and so forth. I - I think the Republican Party contains a lot of legislators who recognize that; and we know that because those folks voted for a comprehensive bill in the Senate that in many ways was more generous than I was able to offer through executive action. So - so, the question then becomes, by me having taken these actions, does that spur those voices in the Republican Party who I think genuinely believe immigration is good for our country? Does it spur them to work once again with Democrats and my administration to get a reasonable piece of legislation done? Or does it simply solidify what I do think is - is a nativist trend in parts of the Republican Party? And - and if it is the latter, then probably we are not going to get much more progress done and it'll be a major debate in the next presidential election. I think that if a Republican lawmaker was sitting here, he might say, Wait a minute. I am not captive to nativist elements. I have actual concerns and you are not addressing them. Well, the problem is what are those concerns and - and how is it that I am not addressing them? If - if the concern is border security, we have got more resources, more border police, more money being spent at our borders than any time in the last 30, 40 years. If the concern is the flow of illegal workers into the country, that flow is about half of what it was and is lower than any time since the 1970s. So, you know, you have to describe specifically what are the concerns that you have got. If you are concerned that somehow immigrants - illegal immigrants are a drain on resources and forcing, you know, Americans to - to pay for services for these folks, well, every study shows that is just not the case. Generally, these folks do not use a lot of services and my executive action specifically is crafted so that they are not a drain on taxpayers; instead, they are going to be paying taxes, and we can make sure that they are.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3350, "text": "So, you know, they'd have to identify for me specifically what those concerns are other than some sense that, you know, these folks should - just should not be here. Is the United States more racially divided than it was when you took office six years ago, ENTITY? No, I actually think that it is probably in its day-to-day interactions less racially divided. But I actually think that the issue has surfaced in a way that probably is healthy. I mean, the - the issue of police and communities of color being mistrustful of each other is hardly new; that dates back a long time. It is just something that has not been talked about - and for a variety of reasons. In some cases, something as simple as the fact that everybody has cell phones now so that you can record some of these events, you know, it is gotten a lot of attention; I think that is good. I think it then points to our ability to solve these problems. It is understandable the polls might say, you know, that race relations have gotten worse - because when it is in the news and you see something like Ferguson or the Garner case in New York, then it attracts attention. But I - I assure you, from the perspective of African Americans or Latinos in poor communities who have been dealing with this all their lives, they would not suggest somehow that it is worse now than it was 10, 15 or 20 years ago. Well, let me mention a couple of data points that perhaps do not suggest it is worse but suggest a broad gulf. One has to do with Ferguson... Which you alluded to. There is a case where there was a grand jury investigation that was released; there were thousands of pages of testimony; people went around reading them - I certainly did. And in the end, surveys showed that majorities of white people thought the grand jury was right not to indict the officer who shot Michael Brown; majorities of African Americans found the grand jury was wrong. How do you lead the country when people see the basic facts so profoundly differently? Not new, but how do you deal with it in your final... I - I think that the fact that there is a conversation about it and that there are tools out there that we know can make a difference in bridging those gaps of understanding and - and - and mistrust; should - should make us optimistic.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3351, "text": "You know, when I was in the state legislature in Illinois, I passed a racial profiling bill. From the perspective of African Americans, yeah, there was a common, you know, phenomenon called driving while black - that you were more likely to be stopped particularly in certain jurisdictions. If you'd asked whites in those jurisdictions do you think traffic stops were done fairly, the majority of whites probably would say yes because it is not something they experi-ence. It is not because of racism; it is just that it is not something that they see. We were able to work with the police departments and the state police in Illinois and persuade them that they would be doing a better job policing if we just kept track so that we had data. And combined with training, suddenly those officers out there are more intentional about how they decide should I stop somebody or not. And the incidents of racial profiling went down. The same is true with a lot of these issues. If you have good policing - I guarantee you that nobody's interested more in good policing than African American community or Latino community because they are more likely to be victimized, if they are in low income communities, by crime. And the task force that I have put together is drawing from police and faith community and civic leaders and activists - and what is been striking to me in the conversations we have had is - is that they are interested in solving a problem as opposed to simply stewing in the hopelessness of race relations in this country. And - and - and I am convinced that we actually are going to see progress on this issue next year. Let me ask about another data point that reflects on the Democratic Party that you will want to leave behind in a... Couple of years - and this is something that has changed in recent years. As everybody knows, the coalition that is elected you twice included huge minority participation - record minority participation. You had huge percentages... The white vote for Democrats has gone down to rather dramatic levels, which suggests a political division between races that is different than it used to be. So, when I was elected in '08, I actually did better among white voters in some jurisdictions than John Kerry did. 2012, it might have dipped, but it was still on par with what had happened before.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3352, "text": "In the midterms because of the nature of the electorate, it tends to exaggerate some of these racial differences - I guess my point being that I think it ebbs and flows in part given circumstances. I do think that right now there are a lot of white working class voters who have not seen enough progress economically in their own lives, and despite the work that we have done to try to strengthen the economy and address issues like child care or minimum wage or increasing manufacturing, that is not what they read about or hear about in the newspapers. They hear about an immigration debate or they hear about, you know, debate surrounding Ferguson, and they think, I am being left out. Nobody seems to be thinking about how tough it is for me right now, or I have been down-scaled, I have lost my job, et cetera. You know, part of my responsibility then is to communicate directly to those voters. And part of the Democratic Party's job is to communicate directly to those voters and say to them, You know what? We are fighting for you. And one of the best examples of this is the Affordable Care Act, which - if you were just looking at the way it is been couched and characterized by the Republican Party, and in some cases by the news, the perception is somehow that this is largely something that is benefiting black and Hispanic and downscale voters. Well, the truth of the matter is that a state like Kentucky that does not have a massive black or Hispanic population has been one of the strongest states - Mitch McConnell's state's one of the best states in using the Affordable Care Act to insure huge numbers of working class white voters. It is just they do not call it Obamacare; they call it something else. And - and so, there is sometimes a gap in perceptions that we have to bridge. I think there is a legitimate sense of loss, particularly among men, who have seen manufacturing diminish; construction has been in the tank. The jobs that are out there are not ones that are traditionally jobs that, you know, blue collar men aspire to. And, you know, we have got to speak to those concerns. Now, the flip side is, you know, nobody would - would be happier than me to see the Republican Party try to broaden its coalition. Immigration reform, by the way, was a great opportunity for the - for the Republican Party to do so.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3353, "text": "The fact that I got - I have received 75 percent of the Latino vote and 70 percent of the Asian American vote in the last two elections is something that the Republican Party should worry about because it is actually fixable for them. George Bush - I disagreed with a lot of issues. But he was absolutely right in his position on - on promoting comprehensive immigration reform, reaching out to the Latino community, and as a consequence, did pretty well. So - so, some of this I think is - is a matter of circumstance. There is a burden on Democrats to need to make very clear to a broad swath of working class and middle class voters that we are, in fact, fighting for them. And there is also an obligation on the part of the Republican Party to make sure that they are broadening their coalition to reach out to the new face of America. Let me ask a few questions, ENTITY, about America's place in the world and how you see it and how you'd like to move it if you can in the last couple of years that you have. We are speaking at a moment after you have announced that you are restoring diplomatic relations with Cuba. You want to reopen an embassy there. Is there any scenario under which you can envision, in your final two years, opening a U.S. embassy in Tehran? I - I never say never, but I think these things have to go in steps. You know, Cuba is a circumstance in which for 50 years, we have done the same thing over and over again and there had not been any change. And the question was, should we try something different with a relatively tiny country that does not pose any significant threat to us or our allies? Tehran is a large, sophisticated country that has a track record of state-sponsored ter-rorism, that we know was attempting to develop a nuclear weapon, or at least the component parts that would be required to develop a nuclear weapon; that has engaged in disruptions to our allies; whose rhetoric is not only explicitly anti-American but also has been incendiary when it comes to its attitude towards the state of Israel. So, there is a lot of history there that is different from the history between us and Cuba. And the strategic importance of - of Tehran is - or Iran is different from what we face with Cuba.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3354, "text": "Having said that, if we can get a deal on making sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon - and that deal is possible; we know the terms of what that would look like. If Iran recognizes that it is in its own interests, having already said that they are actually not interested in developing a nuclear weapon, to go ahead and prove that to the world, so that over time as it is verified, sanctions are removed, their economy begins to grow, they are reintegrated into the international community - if we can take that big first step, then my hope would be that that would serve as the basis for us trying to improve relations over time. You know, I was asked very early in my - my presidential race back in 2007 - would I meet with these various rogue regimes? And what I said then remains true. If I thought it advances American interests, yes; I believe in diplomacy, I believe in dialogue, I believe in engagement. But in order for us to I think open that aperture with respect to Iran, we have to get this nuclear issue resolved - and there is a chance to do it and the question's going to be whether or not Iran is willing to seize it. I think there are elements inside of Iran that recognize the opportunity and want to take it; I think there is some hardliners inside of Iran that are threatened by a resolution of this because they are so invested politically and emotionally in being anti-American or anti-Western that - that it is frightening for them to - to open themselves up to the world in this way. That raises a word that I want to bring up that former Secretary of State Clinton used in a speech the other day. She was criticized for talking about empathy - having empathy or understanding for even enemies around the world. There are, though, military people who use empathy for the enemy, by which they mean not sympathy but understanding the enemy so you can... Do you feel that you have sufficient empathy for the Iranians, meaning do you feel you understand what it is they need to get a deal done and is it possible? I think we do because if you - if you look at the negotiations as they have proceeded, what we have said to the Iranians is that we are willing to recognize your ability to develop a modest nuclear power program for your energy needs - that there is a way of doing that that nevertheless gives the world assurances that you do not have breakout capacity.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3355, "text": "And, you know, Iran suffered from a terrible war with Iraq in which millions of their countrymen were lost. They have legitimate defense concerns - but those have to be separated out from the adventurism, the support of organizations like Hezbollah, the threats they have directed towards Israel. And - and so, on the one hand, you need to understand what their legitimate needs and concerns are. On the other end, you do not need to tolerate or make excuses for positions that they have taken that violate international law, are contrary to U.S. interests, are contrary to the interests of our allies. They have got a chance to get right with the world. This is not just about us. I mean, there is a reason why we have been able to get this far in the negotiations. We mobilized the international community at the start of my presidency - a classic example of American leadership. The sanctions worked because we did not just get our usual allies' support of this; we got China in support of it; we have Russia that still is supportive of the position that the P5+1 has taken in negotiations. So, when I came into office, the world was divided and Iran was in the driver's seat. Now the world's united because of the actions we have taken and Iran's the one that is isolated. They have a path to break through that isolation and they should seize it. Because if they do, there is incredible talent and resources and sophistication inside of - inside of Iran and it would be a very successful regional power that was also abiding by international norms and international rules - and that would be good for everybody. That would be good for the United States, that would be good for the region, and most of all, it would be good for the Iranian people. One other question, ENTITY - in a speech in September, you spoke of the United States' legacy of freedom, is the phrase that you used. You spoke of preserving that and wanting to extend it. I want to ask about efforts to extend the idea of freedom or democracy around the world, particularly in the Middle East. You disagreed with invading Iraq partly to de-mocratize that country. You had your own efforts - and Egypt has not turned out very well... It came full circle and it is back under military rule. Libya's in chaos; Syria's in chaos; Tunisia is maybe the only thing that has arguably come out of the...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3356, "text": "Do you feel that you understand proper and potentially successful ways to extend democracy in the Middle East over your final two years? I think it is important to distinguish between the actions that we take to promote democracy and human rights and rule of law and good governance and the humility to understand that, in the end, these things are going to happen because the people in these countries demand them. Let me just move out of the Middle East momentarily and then we will swing back. This is one of the most isolated countries for the last 40 years, ruled by a brutal, repressive military junta. We seized that opportunity. We engaged with Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Prize winner, but we also engaged with President Sein, who saw that Burma was traveling down a dead end. They had parliamentary elections for the first time. They are now preparing to amend their constitution and schedule broader parliamentary elections. And there are all kinds of troubles in Burma; the experiment may go haywire. They may not be able to reconcile all the different ethnic groups inside the country; the military ultimately may not be willing to give up its prerogatives and its power. Now, we want to be on the side of those who can take advantage of that opportunity. I feel very confident, very good about the work we are doing there. But I cannot guarantee success because ultimately it is going to be up to the Burmese people and Burmese leaders to seize this moment. The Middle East, I think, is - is similar, but in some ways even more difficult. Because you have this counter-narrative in the Middle East in which a sizable portion of Islamic extremists have been able to penetrate the imaginations of young people there; you have govern - governments that oftentimes are creaky, do not serve their people, are repressive; you do not have a civic tradition there. And so, you have to almost start from scratch in many of these countries. What we can do is to be opportunistic and find places where somebody's ready and willing to move forward and do everything we can to help - and Tunisia's a great example of that. Not perfect - still dangerous, still troublesome; but you have seen a civil society develop, elections take place, a constitution get drafted, Islamists being willing to be involved in the political process without trying to take it over completely and accommodations to the fact that economic and social reforms are required for that country to succeed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3357, "text": "You have not seen it in Libya; it is broken off into tribal elements. Which raises a question - is there a responsibility by the United States to do more in Libya, having been involved in... I - I think that the challenge that we are going to have is a recognition that we are hugely influential; we are the one indispensable nation. But when it comes to nation-building, when it comes to what is going to be a generational project in a place like Libya or a place like Syria or a place like Iraq, we can help, but we cannot do it for them. Now, I think the American people recognize that. There are times here in Washington where pundits do not ; they think you can just move chess pieces around the table. And whenever we have that kind of hubris, we tend to get burned. Where we are successful is where we see an opportunity, we put resources in, we support those who are trying to do the right thing for their society; and every so often, something breaks. But - but I think that one of the things I have learned over six years, and it does not always suit the news cycle, is having some strategic patience. You will recall that three or four months ago, everybody in Washington was convinced that President Putin was a genius... And he had outmaneuvered all of us and he had, you know, bullied and, you know, strategized his way into expanding Russian power. And I said at the time we do not want war with Russia but we can apply steady pressure working with our European partners, being the backbone of an international coalition to oppose Russia's violation of another country's sovereignty, and that over time, this would be a strategic mistake by Russia. And today, you know, I'd - I'd sense that at least outside of Russia, maybe some people are thinking what Putin did was not so smart. Are you just lucky that the price of oil went down and therefore their cur-rency collapsed or... Is it something that you did? And part of our rationale in this process was that the only thing keeping that economy afloat was the price of oil.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3358, "text": "And if, in fact, we were steady in applying sanction pressure, which we have been, that over time it would make the - the economy of Russia sufficiently vulnerable that if and when there were disruptions with respect to the price of oil - which inevitably, there are going to be sometime, if not this year then next year or the year after - that they'd have enormous difficulty managing it. I - I say that, not to suggest that we have solved Ukraine, but I am saying that to - to give an indication that when it comes to the international stage, these problems are big, they are difficult, they are messy. But wherever we have been involved over the last several years, I think the outcome has been better because of American leadership. Because of American leadership, not only have we not seen another Ebola case here in the United States - and when we do, we will be prepared for it - but internationally, resources, medics, testing, science has poured into poor countries. We are practically rebuilding their public health infrastructure because of our leadership. It does not happen in two weeks; it does not happen in - in four weeks. But if we are steady about it and we are focused and we are clear that we possess capacities as well as values that require us to engage, that we will be successful. Just to wrap this up with this idea that you began with, of doing things that you want to do rather than... Have to do, has your limited response to ISIS in Iraq and Syria been driven in part by a sense that this is a very dangerous threat, but not the biggest problem the United States faces in the world, and you do not want to be distracted from far bigger things going on elsewhere? I think we cannot underestimate the danger of ISIL. They are a terrorist network that, unlike Al Qaeda, has not limited itself to the periodic attack but have aspirations to control large swaths of territory, that possess resources and effectively an army that pose great dangers to our allies and can destabilize entire regions that are very dangerous for us. So, I - I do not want to downplay that threat. It is a real one; it is the reason why I have authorized, as part of a broader 60 nation coalition, an effort to fight back and to push them back and ultimately destroy them. America is probably as well positioned for the future as we have been in a very long time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3359, "text": "We have created more jobs since I have been ENTITY than Japan, Europe and every other advanced nation combined. Our energy resources, both conventional and clean energy resources, put most other of our competitors to shame. Demographically, we have got a young population, in part because of immigration. We have got the best universities in the world; we have got the best workers in the world. Our manufacturing base has come roaring back, led by the auto industry, but not restricted by it. Our deficits I have cut by two-thirds. And so, if you look out towards the future, America is in a great position and our military is more capable than any military in history. We do not really have a serious peer, at least on the conventional level, although obviously Russia is a - is a significant nuclear power. The question then becomes, alright, how do we play those cards well? Part of it is at-tending to immediate problems like ISIL; part of it is making sure that we are firm in upholding international norms as we have been in Ukraine; part of it is managing short-term crises that could turn into long-term disasters if we are not attentive, like Ebola. But ultimately, the thing that is most dangerous for the United States is us not tending to the very sources of our strength. So, it is true that when it comes to ISIL, us devoting another trillion dollars after having been involved in big occupations of countries that did not turn out all that well - I am very hesitant to do that because we need to spend a trillion dollars rebuilding our schools, our roads, our basic science and research here in the United States; that is going to be a recipe for our long-term security and success. And what we have also learned is that if we do for others what they need to do for themselves - if we come in and send the Marines in to fight ISIL and the Iraqis have no skin in the game, then it is not going to last. When we look at an issue like Ukraine, we have to be firm with the Russians but we have also got to make sure that we have got our own fiscal house in order; we got to make sure that we are doing what we need to do to build our manufacturing base because ultimately, the big advantage we have with Russia is we have got a dynamic, vital economy, and they do not . They rely on oil; we rely on oil and iPads and movies and you name it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio1", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-1", "publication_date": "18-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3362, "text": "On immigration, Valerie Jarrett was quoted in Las Vegas as saying that there is a window between now and August to get immigration overhaul done. And she says, We have a commitment from Speaker Boehner, who is very frustrated with his caucus. And in a tweet today, Valerie herself said that this was lost in translation and that she actually meant that it was a commitment to trying. But I guess the question is -- a commitment to trying what and when? Speaker Boehner, other House Republican leaders and leading Republicans outside of the House of Representatives have all expressed deep interest in moving forward on immigration reform. And we have found those comments and that interest to be encouraging and indicative of some movement among Republicans in the House towards support for comprehensive immigration reform. What the President has said and others have said is that the opportunity before us is something very rare and we ought to seize it here in Washington, all of us. The House ought to follow the Senate's lead and pass comprehensive immigration reform. In the Senate, a comprehensive bill passed with Democratic and Republican support. Republicans across the country, business leaders across the country, faith leaders and law enforcement leaders across the country are behind this effort. They recognize that passing comprehensive immigration reform will provide a huge boost to our economy, to our security, to principles of fairness. And for those reasons we ought to move forward, and what we hope is that the House will move. And that is a message that Valerie was carrying and that we have all been carrying for some time now. Is the suggestion here that if does not happen by August, or at the end of August -- have an August recess -- that the President will take matters into his own hands, he has some authority to do some things -- that we do something beyond just tweaking the margins? Well, I am not going to speculate about the future. What we have always said will always remain true, which is comprehensive immigration reform requires action by Congress. The President is always interested in moving the ball forward on his agenda where he can, even if Congress refuses to act. But there are some things that require congressional action, and this is one of them. So the Senate acted in this Congress, and has put a bill forward that enjoys broad bipartisan support across the country in communities and among interest groups that do not often get together behind the same priority.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney124", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-124", "publication_date": "16-05-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3363, "text": "And we hope that Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader Cantor, Chairman Ryan and others hear all the voices of support, including traditional Republican voices, traditional conservative voices for comprehensive immigration reform and move forward with it. That is what Valerie was talking about. That is what the President has talked about and I have talked about and others. We should get this done for our economy. We should get this done for our security. We should get this done because it will allow us to innovate more here in this country in ways that will build our economy and create high-paying jobs in this country. So the opportunity is there for the taking, and we hope that the Speaker and other Republican leaders in the House avail themselves of the opportunity. A question on Ukraine -- reports today of pro-Russian insurgents pulling out of buildings, government buildings in the city of Mariupol. And this is because steelworkers employed by one of the wealthiest men in Ukraine are patrolling the streets with police officers. I am wondering, is that a welcome development at the White House? Or is there a concern that the government in Kyiv is relying on oligarchs to essentially run the government in these tense regions? Well, I am not sure that is how I would interpret the story that you are referring to. We certainly welcome any indication that separatists that have seized buildings, who have set up roadblocks, stockpiled weapons, are vacating buildings and ceasing the kinds of activities that have only destabilized the situation in Ukraine and led to confrontations and violence. And the fact that significant portions of the population in Ukraine, including in eastern Ukraine, do not support the agenda of Russian-backed separatists but support a united Ukraine and support a process by which decisions around constitutional reform and devolution of power from the center are made in an appropriate way -- that is a good thing. These are the kinds of issues that the Ukrainian government in Kyiv has promised will be discussed in dialogue with Ukrainians from all parts of the country at roundtables that are facilitated by the OSCE. And all of this comes as we move closer now to a presidential election on May 25. And our focus and the focus of the OSCE and the Ukrainian government and all of our partners in this effort is on ensuring that those elections are able to go forward. And the OSCE has reported that the preparations, the technical preparations for the elections are proceeding well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney124", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-124", "publication_date": "16-05-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3364, "text": "Separatists have disrupted preparations in some isolated areas of Donetsk and Luhansk, but in the vast majority of the country, as you know, Jim, the situation is calm and preparations are on track. ENTITY, General Motors was assessed a $35 million fine today over its ignition switch issues. I have not discussed it with him. I would refer you to obviously the agency involved here, the Department of Transportation and the National Highway Safety and Traffic -- NTSB, whatever that acronym stands for. But they are the bodies that you should address questions about it to. Has he been following that issue? Well, he is certainly broadly been following it. It is been an issue that is received a lot of attention, understandably. But in terms of that process, that is not something that I would have a lot to say about. You have talked a lot about the issue with China and Vietnam, and wanting that to be resolved in a way that is diplomatic and without provocation. Do you want China to move the oil tanker? Here is what I'd say about that -- and I appreciate the question. First of all, we are closely following, out of our mission to Vietnam, the protests in Vietnam around this issue. But regarding the broader issue of China's unilateral decision to introduce an oil rig accompanied by numerous government vessels for the first time in waters disputed with Vietnam, we would say what we have said repeatedly, which is this is a provocative act and it raises tensions in the region, and by raising tensions makes it more difficult to resolve claims over disputed territory in a manner that supports peace and stability in the region. So we consider that act provocative and we consider it one that undermines the goal that we share, which is a peaceful resolution of these disputes and general stability in the region. We are very concerned about dangerous conduct and intimidation by government-controlled assets operating in this area. And we call on all parties to conduct themselves in a safe and professional manner to preserve freedom of navigation and overflight, to exercise restraint, to take steps to lower tensions, and to address competing sovereignty claims peacefully and in accordance with international law. As you know, sovereignty over these islands, the Paracel Islands, is disputed. This is occurring in waters claimed by both Vietnam and China near those islands. These events highlight the need for claimants to clarify their claims in accordance with international law and to reach agreement on appropriate behavior and activities in disputed areas.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney124", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-124", "publication_date": "16-05-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}