MR. GIBBS: I’m saying that in order to address the most
up-to-date threats possible, we have instituted the very best in technology and in screening efforts in order to detect that threat.
Q And what’s wrong with the Israeli system, where they’re questioning before they even get close to the gate? Is that --
MR. GIBBS: I would point out that I think the Israelis have, I think, it’s two airports -- two international airports. I think that’s right. It’s one?
Q It’s one, I think --
MR. GIBBS: -- in Tel Aviv. We have 450. This is -- there is a scale that is -- and I’ve seen -- look, I’ve watched and read the stories of, well, can’t you just do what -- understanding the scale involved is infinitely different.
11/22/2010 Press Briefing
Dear Mr. President,
It's snowing in Seattle, reminding me that in the early days of this blog I often wrote to you about the snow on the East Coast. I guess that means the year is actually coming to an end. Whoever reads your mail is probably pretty happy about that.
This winter, the addition of new airport screening methods is causing quite a stir with holiday travelers. The invasive scans and pat-downs have been discussed with anger, mortification and no small amount of humor from those who have experienced them. When I saw the exchange between Robert Gibbs and the reporter suggesting that the US adopt Israeli airport procedures, I had to chuckle a little. He doesn't finish his sentence, but he seems to suggest that he's heard stories about Israeli airports that would make the reporter reconsider this idea. Having had my own experience with the security practices of the Tel Aviv airport, I found this whole thing (the reporter's naive suggestion and Mr. Gibbs' politically correct self-censorship) kind of hilarious.
I've long wondered how much Americans would put up with in the name of our own illusion of safety. Because an illusion is all it is. Some one will invent a bomb that can't be seen on the scanners, or a new way to blow up airplanes. And then maybe we will have to be given polygraphs before getting on board. The Israeli woman who stripped me down to my underwear and yelled at me for an hour didn't make any one on that flight any safer by doing so. I'm certain that she believed she did, and that the other security officials and the TSA scanners all believe they are doing the right thing. (Or at least aren't bothered enough by it to find other jobs.) So I'm not going to criticize them. They are the face (and hands) of the policy, but not the suits behind it.
I've seen a number of bloggers and commentators make the point that this is what the terrorists wanted. To scare us into ridiculous, invasive, un-American behavior. I have to say I agree with them. This method of random screening is just not effective. At my own job, I could search the bags of every person leaving the store to make sure they aren't stealing (or "randomly screen" one in ten bags) but I'd quickly alienate our customers and everyone- the store, the customers, and me, would suffer as a result. Instead, my coworkers and I look for behavior that is suspicious or for the faces of past offenders. We share information with other stores and they with us, and we work together to help each other prevent theft whenever possible.
I do understand that theft and mass murder are much different. Some one who gets away with stealing is easier to shrug off than some one who successfully blows up an airplane. But, for all of the security innovation since 9/11, time and time again, the factor most responsible for preventing attacks has been the awareness of other passengers and airline employees. I do not believe that the sacrifice of our freedoms (or our dignity) is necessary to keep us safe. It may make those of you in positions of authority feel better, as though you have minimized your own responsibility for any tragedies that might strike, but that doesn't sound quite as nobel when used to justify this suspect behavior.
For now, I'm going to go play in the snow and be grateful I'm not flying anywhere this holiday season. I sincerely hope you reconsider this policy, and remember that the erosion of our liberties is a far greater victory for those who seek to destroy this country than any loss of life could ever be.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Showing posts with label Robert Gibbs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robert Gibbs. Show all posts
Monday, November 22, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Day 231- الشهادة
Dear Mr. President,
At today's press gaggle three numbers were mentioned by the press. 500,000- the number of unemployment claims filed last week, the worst in 2010. 50,000- the number of US troops still in Iraq. And 18- the percentage of Americans who believe that you are Muslim, according to a new Pew poll. Worsening unemployment, the nuance of ending a war, and an poll illustrating that a significant number of Americans (and 31% of Republicans) are not only ill-informed, they're stubborn about it. You weren't at the Press Gaggle, Mr. President, but I'll bet I don't have to tell you which got the most discussion and interest from the press. Why is it that this story just won't quit? That members of Congress can feed it and still be taken seriously? I think it's probably because every time the White House is confronted with this rumor, instead of saying "next question", the press secretary (or, in this case, his deputy) sputter for 5 minutes about your devout Christianity. The President prays, every day. The President speaks to religious advisors, every day. The President speaks with Christian leaders for advice.
I didn't vote for you because I think you're Christian. Your job isn't to be correctly perceived by every yahoo who thinks you were born in Kenya and here to bring about the End Times. No one is going to stop believing that you're a Muslim if they are already convinced it is so. You can't prove faith. Gibbs and Burton can profess your faith before God and the Press Corps every day and it isn't going to change the minds of those 18%. Anderson Cooper got on TV and showed the world proof that your birth certificate is your birth certificate and I am confident that it made exactly no difference with those who still doubt your citizenship. (Though, to be fair, it may have changed their opinion of Anderson Cooper.)
The media is perhaps to blame for devoting so much energy and discussion to this topic. One reporter seemed to imply that the perception was the White House's fault- that somehow the American people weren't able to know their President. I think this, and other suggestions from the press that you ought to talk about your faith more in public, are absurd. The amount of information about you available to Americans is unprecedented. As far as I know, polls didn't indicate a significant number of people suspected President Bush or Clinton or Reagan to be Muslim. This perception is allowed to continue because of xenophobia and racism. People are afraid of the unfamiliar and your political opponents have been trying to paint you as unfamiliar since you started in politics. It isn't something that people need to be persuaded to change their minds about because it isn't rational. It isn't the White House's responsibility to combat this. The perception of you as a Muslim goes up as your poll numbers go down. I don't think people are having new doubts about your Christianity, I think your declining popularity has made it more socially acceptable to suggest their crazy theories out loud. Call a spade a spade (and a racist a racist) and move on.
But this isn't entirely the media's fault, or entirely their responsibility to correct. The discussion about the Pew poll was some of the least guarded interaction between the Deputy Press Secretary and the Press corps. Robert Gibbs and Bill Burton are constantly spinning, obfuscating, splitting hairs, and spewing talking points. Try having a frank conversation with the press about something that actually matters- like the economic outlook or the state of our foreign relations. Instead of coming up with the right sound byte to reassure people that you've got this under control, be honest. Be honest about what challenges we face and how much of the responsibility to overcome them is up to us and the important changes we need to make in our own lives. The White House needs to find a way to connect with people honestly, and the swatting wildly at ridiculous rumors while spinning the latest unemployment numbers (while trying to help half of the Senate run for re-election) just isn't going to cut it.
People do need honesty and access, but not because they doubt your religion. Please, don't let your administration get caught up in this nonsense when we have so many graver concerns ahead.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Day 224- In praise of Wikileaks
Dear Mr. President,
I have been reluctant to write to you about the recent Wikileaks controversy. I've followed Wikileaks for several months now, and, during the buildup to the release of the secret documents I was certainly anxious to find out what information they would contain, even as I was hesitant about the idea of leaking military secrets. I understand that you can't be expected to be happy about the release of secret documents, no matter how harmless they might seem, but I do think that Wikileaks serves an important purpose.
Our government is meant to be open to public scrutiny. I understand the need for national security and the secrecy that goes along with it, but the American government has become too comfortable misleading or outright lying to the American people. This deception seems especially widespread in military matters, and the kind of information released in the Wikileaks documents demonstrates that often these lies are for the simple purpose of painting military action in a more favorable light. A disturbingly large amount of our tax dollars goes to fund the Defense Department without significant public scrutiny. (Go ahead, Mr. Gibbs, say what you will, but I'm not for eliminating the Pentagon and I'm not using drugs.)
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I would like to know what my tax dollars are buying, and how successful the operations being funded are. Beyond the monetary issues, there is a moral imperative for every American to know how, exactly, our country is representing itself in times of war. By allowing the public to access this information on Afghanistan, (or revealing evidence of US troops targeting civilians in Iraq,) Wikileaks is doing it's part to ensure that this government continues to be of and by and for the people. It's the American public's way of telling our government that we simply can't be cut out of the loop and fed a palatable bedtime story. We will find out the truth.
Perhaps people would rather be told lies, so long as they are safe and aren't asked to think too much? I think that is an incredibly cynical way of looking at the American people. Some of your most eloquent writing is on the need to leave behind our cynicism and do our part to make our country stronger. How can you ask us to do this for a government that lies to us? A government that told us the truth about our military operations, even if that truth was ugly or hard to hear, would not risk this kind of exposure. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been awful, world-changing events that will forever alter the way the world views Americans. It is the responsibility and right of every American to know exactly how and why this war is being waged. I know that you cannot publicly do anything but denounce Wikileaks, but you ought to strive to lead a government that would not engender this kind of necessary mistrust of the stories we're being told. A site like Wikileaks could not exist if the government didn't make it absolutely necessary.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I have been reluctant to write to you about the recent Wikileaks controversy. I've followed Wikileaks for several months now, and, during the buildup to the release of the secret documents I was certainly anxious to find out what information they would contain, even as I was hesitant about the idea of leaking military secrets. I understand that you can't be expected to be happy about the release of secret documents, no matter how harmless they might seem, but I do think that Wikileaks serves an important purpose.
Our government is meant to be open to public scrutiny. I understand the need for national security and the secrecy that goes along with it, but the American government has become too comfortable misleading or outright lying to the American people. This deception seems especially widespread in military matters, and the kind of information released in the Wikileaks documents demonstrates that often these lies are for the simple purpose of painting military action in a more favorable light. A disturbingly large amount of our tax dollars goes to fund the Defense Department without significant public scrutiny. (Go ahead, Mr. Gibbs, say what you will, but I'm not for eliminating the Pentagon and I'm not using drugs.)
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I would like to know what my tax dollars are buying, and how successful the operations being funded are. Beyond the monetary issues, there is a moral imperative for every American to know how, exactly, our country is representing itself in times of war. By allowing the public to access this information on Afghanistan, (or revealing evidence of US troops targeting civilians in Iraq,) Wikileaks is doing it's part to ensure that this government continues to be of and by and for the people. It's the American public's way of telling our government that we simply can't be cut out of the loop and fed a palatable bedtime story. We will find out the truth.
Perhaps people would rather be told lies, so long as they are safe and aren't asked to think too much? I think that is an incredibly cynical way of looking at the American people. Some of your most eloquent writing is on the need to leave behind our cynicism and do our part to make our country stronger. How can you ask us to do this for a government that lies to us? A government that told us the truth about our military operations, even if that truth was ugly or hard to hear, would not risk this kind of exposure. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been awful, world-changing events that will forever alter the way the world views Americans. It is the responsibility and right of every American to know exactly how and why this war is being waged. I know that you cannot publicly do anything but denounce Wikileaks, but you ought to strive to lead a government that would not engender this kind of necessary mistrust of the stories we're being told. A site like Wikileaks could not exist if the government didn't make it absolutely necessary.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Day 223- The Professional Left
Dear Mr. President,
A number of people are upset with Robert Gibbs for his comments about the "professional left." I'll admit, when I first read Mr. Gibbs' remarks, I was hurt. It seems like a cheap shot to call out the segment of the political spectrum responsible for Mr. Gibbs' employment, especially when the promises made by your campaign to the left have been so ostentatiously delayed, compromised or outright broken. Several members of your senior staff, including Rahm Emanuel, have made remarks disparaging progressive voters. The left is crazy. The left is unreasonable. The left uses drugs. Due respect, sir, but without the left you never would have been elected. Without our energy, our hope, our lofty expectations, John McCain would be President and Robert Gibbs would have a gig as a talking head on MSNBC.
I don't understand what your administration hopes to gain by dismissing those who aren't willing to lower our expectations of you just because this job is difficult. Yes, the economy is in trouble. Yes, wars can't simply be walked away from. Yes, the health care reform battle was long and bloody. But without those of us willing to call for more progress, better government, and more social justice, you're never going to accomplish the goals that I know you have for your own Presidency. And your senior staff mocks us? I'm not saying you ought to bow to every whim of the ideological left, but you could at least treat us with the respect any public servant owes his constituents. It's easy to earn points looking centrist by betraying your friends and allies, but it won't win you elections and it won't give you a Presidency you can look back on with pride.
We've never been the most popular kids in class, Mr. President, but none of the cheerleaders are going to date you just for making fun of us. Show the political courage, or at least the common decency to be as respectful of those on the left as you are of your opponents on the right. We're not a joke, and it would be a true shame for you to realize that on the loosing side of election day. I think you should ask Mr. Gibbs to apologize, Mr. President, and I think your entire administration ought to do a better job remember who its friends are.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
A number of people are upset with Robert Gibbs for his comments about the "professional left." I'll admit, when I first read Mr. Gibbs' remarks, I was hurt. It seems like a cheap shot to call out the segment of the political spectrum responsible for Mr. Gibbs' employment, especially when the promises made by your campaign to the left have been so ostentatiously delayed, compromised or outright broken. Several members of your senior staff, including Rahm Emanuel, have made remarks disparaging progressive voters. The left is crazy. The left is unreasonable. The left uses drugs. Due respect, sir, but without the left you never would have been elected. Without our energy, our hope, our lofty expectations, John McCain would be President and Robert Gibbs would have a gig as a talking head on MSNBC.
I don't understand what your administration hopes to gain by dismissing those who aren't willing to lower our expectations of you just because this job is difficult. Yes, the economy is in trouble. Yes, wars can't simply be walked away from. Yes, the health care reform battle was long and bloody. But without those of us willing to call for more progress, better government, and more social justice, you're never going to accomplish the goals that I know you have for your own Presidency. And your senior staff mocks us? I'm not saying you ought to bow to every whim of the ideological left, but you could at least treat us with the respect any public servant owes his constituents. It's easy to earn points looking centrist by betraying your friends and allies, but it won't win you elections and it won't give you a Presidency you can look back on with pride.
We've never been the most popular kids in class, Mr. President, but none of the cheerleaders are going to date you just for making fun of us. Show the political courage, or at least the common decency to be as respectful of those on the left as you are of your opponents on the right. We're not a joke, and it would be a true shame for you to realize that on the loosing side of election day. I think you should ask Mr. Gibbs to apologize, Mr. President, and I think your entire administration ought to do a better job remember who its friends are.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, June 7, 2010
Day 158- Helen Thomas
Dear Mr. President,
Helen Thomas's remarks were offensive to many people. I don't think there is any one, including Ms. Thomas, who would deny that. Her remarks have inspired more forceful outrage from your administration than the 9 dead civillians on board the Mavi Marmara. I can't speak for any one else, but that offends me, deeply. What Helen said, while upsetting, didn't kill any one, didn't destroy families or cut short the life of an American teenager. Her words didn't cost any one an eye, didn't shed a single drop of blood. Yet, while the 9 innocent dead managed to summon your dismay and regret, her non-lethal words were called reprehensible.
Murder is reprehensible. The prolonged suffering and starvation of the people of Gaza is reprehensible. And I would have no problem with your administration calling her words reprehensible, as well, if you had managed the same level of outrage after the flotilla attack. Her career, a long and distinguished one that inspired a generation of women in journalism, is now over. I don't think that what she said was right, I don't think that what she said was fair, but I know, for sure, that no one died as a result.
I know these last few weeks have been spent trying to strike the right emotional note with the American public over the oil spill, to some how demonstrate your emotional response is proportional to this tragedy. The hypocrisy of the reaction with regards to Ms. Thomas and to Gaza, the anger stirred over words contrasted with the mild dismay over injury, suffering, and death is, in my opinion, a much more problematic demonstration of how out of step your administration is with the human cost of your policies.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Helen Thomas's remarks were offensive to many people. I don't think there is any one, including Ms. Thomas, who would deny that. Her remarks have inspired more forceful outrage from your administration than the 9 dead civillians on board the Mavi Marmara. I can't speak for any one else, but that offends me, deeply. What Helen said, while upsetting, didn't kill any one, didn't destroy families or cut short the life of an American teenager. Her words didn't cost any one an eye, didn't shed a single drop of blood. Yet, while the 9 innocent dead managed to summon your dismay and regret, her non-lethal words were called reprehensible.
Murder is reprehensible. The prolonged suffering and starvation of the people of Gaza is reprehensible. And I would have no problem with your administration calling her words reprehensible, as well, if you had managed the same level of outrage after the flotilla attack. Her career, a long and distinguished one that inspired a generation of women in journalism, is now over. I don't think that what she said was right, I don't think that what she said was fair, but I know, for sure, that no one died as a result.
I know these last few weeks have been spent trying to strike the right emotional note with the American public over the oil spill, to some how demonstrate your emotional response is proportional to this tragedy. The hypocrisy of the reaction with regards to Ms. Thomas and to Gaza, the anger stirred over words contrasted with the mild dismay over injury, suffering, and death is, in my opinion, a much more problematic demonstration of how out of step your administration is with the human cost of your policies.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Day 83- Jedi chess
Dear Mr. President,
It appears as though the press corps is giving Robert Gibbs quite a rough time about your meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu. This is one of those moments where, watching from the outside, being privy to nothing but what the media and the White House reveals, I have to concede I don't know enough to be certain about what you're doing. It seems as though you might be taking private steps toward toughening our stance on Israeli settlement activity. It seems as though you might be leveraging this latest incident into legitimate efforts at peace talks. But this could just be speculation.
Not long ago, when the battle for health care reform seemed to be getting the best of you, Jon Stewart said "I can’t tell if he’s a Jedi master playing chess on a three-level board way ahead of us, or if this is kicking his ass." I sometimes feel the same way about our Middle East policy. I know that my letters often include unbridled anger, disappointment and outrage. I know that, even if you make radical steps toward restarting the peace process, our foreign relations with Israel will likely still be too close for my comfort. I understand, Mr. President, that we will probably never agree on this. I think that my role as your constituent is to continue asserting my position, asking for more than I expect you to do, in the hopes of somehow balancing the AIPACs of the world. Much of my argument is based on the premise that there are absolute rights and absolute wrongs, and that gross oppression of human rights is an example of the latter. I do understand that the nuanced world we live in does not often lend itself well to absolution, and that you may be justifying certain means to an end I can't see or understand yet.
What I mean, sir, is that while I may be sick with grief at the death and suffering, at the injustice and oppression, while I may be exhausted with the fight and frustrated with our hypocrisy, I have faith that you know what you're doing and that you know what is right. I do not surrender my judgment to your own, but I do believe it is possible that you're seeing more than you're willing to let on.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
It appears as though the press corps is giving Robert Gibbs quite a rough time about your meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu. This is one of those moments where, watching from the outside, being privy to nothing but what the media and the White House reveals, I have to concede I don't know enough to be certain about what you're doing. It seems as though you might be taking private steps toward toughening our stance on Israeli settlement activity. It seems as though you might be leveraging this latest incident into legitimate efforts at peace talks. But this could just be speculation.
Not long ago, when the battle for health care reform seemed to be getting the best of you, Jon Stewart said "I can’t tell if he’s a Jedi master playing chess on a three-level board way ahead of us, or if this is kicking his ass." I sometimes feel the same way about our Middle East policy. I know that my letters often include unbridled anger, disappointment and outrage. I know that, even if you make radical steps toward restarting the peace process, our foreign relations with Israel will likely still be too close for my comfort. I understand, Mr. President, that we will probably never agree on this. I think that my role as your constituent is to continue asserting my position, asking for more than I expect you to do, in the hopes of somehow balancing the AIPACs of the world. Much of my argument is based on the premise that there are absolute rights and absolute wrongs, and that gross oppression of human rights is an example of the latter. I do understand that the nuanced world we live in does not often lend itself well to absolution, and that you may be justifying certain means to an end I can't see or understand yet.
What I mean, sir, is that while I may be sick with grief at the death and suffering, at the injustice and oppression, while I may be exhausted with the fight and frustrated with our hypocrisy, I have faith that you know what you're doing and that you know what is right. I do not surrender my judgment to your own, but I do believe it is possible that you're seeing more than you're willing to let on.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, February 22, 2010
Day 53
Dear Mr. President,
Today you released the health care compromise intended to reconcile the bills proposed by the House & the Senate. I'm writing today to bring to your attention the suffering caused by this issue, as so many reporters have bravely tried to mention to Mr. Gibbs, and so many courageous every day men and women with their own opinion shows on news networks bring up every time they talk about health care. Will our pleas fall on deaf ears, Mr. President, or will you finally bring the full weight of your office to free America from health care fatigue once and for all?
After all, every time you wake up one morning and decide to score easy political points by talking about health care, millions of Americans must suffer through tedious, often repetitious debates whenever they accidentally flip to news program between episodes of the The Bachelor. They have to hear the same sob stories of people they've never met, who suffer, go bankrupt and die because of our health care system. Innocent Americans have to know that this goes on, and quite frankly, Mr. President, they don't deserve to. Don't you see what you're doing to them, forcing them to have a vague sense that health care is being discussed again? Assaulting them 24 hours a day with bi-partisan meetings, press conferences, talking heads on TV insisting that we need reform.
I'm pretty tired of it, as well, to be honest, but I'm even more tired of not having access to health care. I'm way more tired of watching my friends and family struggle with medical bills. I'm downright exhausted with the rising number of Americans dying or suffering because they don't have access to affordable health care. I am SO tired of all of this, not because it's taking to long, (though it is,) but because we're still talking about this like it is an issue we can afford to pay less attention to. Anyway, Mr. President, I just wanted to say that those of us who need this reform bill to pass are not getting tired of the debate, we're not expecting things to change over night, and we really don't care how much we have to hear about it, so long as it gets done.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today you released the health care compromise intended to reconcile the bills proposed by the House & the Senate. I'm writing today to bring to your attention the suffering caused by this issue, as so many reporters have bravely tried to mention to Mr. Gibbs, and so many courageous every day men and women with their own opinion shows on news networks bring up every time they talk about health care. Will our pleas fall on deaf ears, Mr. President, or will you finally bring the full weight of your office to free America from health care fatigue once and for all?
After all, every time you wake up one morning and decide to score easy political points by talking about health care, millions of Americans must suffer through tedious, often repetitious debates whenever they accidentally flip to news program between episodes of the The Bachelor. They have to hear the same sob stories of people they've never met, who suffer, go bankrupt and die because of our health care system. Innocent Americans have to know that this goes on, and quite frankly, Mr. President, they don't deserve to. Don't you see what you're doing to them, forcing them to have a vague sense that health care is being discussed again? Assaulting them 24 hours a day with bi-partisan meetings, press conferences, talking heads on TV insisting that we need reform.
I'm pretty tired of it, as well, to be honest, but I'm even more tired of not having access to health care. I'm way more tired of watching my friends and family struggle with medical bills. I'm downright exhausted with the rising number of Americans dying or suffering because they don't have access to affordable health care. I am SO tired of all of this, not because it's taking to long, (though it is,) but because we're still talking about this like it is an issue we can afford to pay less attention to. Anyway, Mr. President, I just wanted to say that those of us who need this reform bill to pass are not getting tired of the debate, we're not expecting things to change over night, and we really don't care how much we have to hear about it, so long as it gets done.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
