Today’s Q’s for O’s WH – 6/10/2009
EmailTAPPER: A couple questions: The shooting today at the Holocaust Museum, combined with the shooting of Dr. Tiller, as well as the shooting of the military recruiter in Little Rock — is the White House at all concerned that there is some sort of trend of political violence or domestic terrorism going on?
GIBBS: I would — I would want to ask somebody in law enforcement if they see links such as that. I don’t — I don’t think it would be wise for me to surmise something like that. I think, as the president said in his statement after the shooting of Dr. Tiller, that regardless of disagreeing or disparate viewpoints, that, obviously, in our society, this is not in any way the type of action that anybody wants to see in settling even the most vehement disputes. But I — it’s hard for me to surmise without having a more in- depth conversation with law enforcement.
TAPPER: This is really just out of curiosity more than anything. How do you guys decide which acts of violence will prompt a White House response and which ones won’t? There was a statement that went out about Dr. Tiller. How is the decision made that that would get a presidential statement, whereas the military recruiter in the Arkansas shooting would not?
GIBBS: Well, I believe a statement did go to many stations in Arkansas regarding that.
TAPPER: OK. And just about executive compensation. What — what’s the response of the White House to the push-back from business groups that the federal government should have no role in deciding how their executive compensation is delivered? Whether it’s a nonbinding resolution or not, it’s not the job of the government to tell them how to run their companies?
GIBBS: Well, look, obviously this is split up into at least three different baskets, I’d say. You have the congressional amendment, the Dodd amendment that passed, covering for the top five corporate officers and the next highest 20 paid employees for all companies receiving some measure of TARP assistance. And that governs limits on bonuses. That’s one. That was congressional intent.
I think you’ll see from the fact sheets that will soon go out — my apologizes that they haven’t — there’s a bit of an expansion from what is in the congressionally mandated amendment that gives for the seven current companies receiving extraordinary assistance, the ability to not simply look at the top five-plus-20, but indeed the top 100 in order to judge, as I said, the soundness, the appropriateness, and whether or not the risk is being — is being taken into account in this.
Lastly, the president has supported, as a member of the Senate, and continues to support efforts that are non-binding shareholder efforts to provide — so that shareholders are empowered to provide some say on the — on the compensation for the managers for the companies for which they invest.
It’s non-binding, but we have seen in, certainly, other countries that have had arrangements like this that the power of public opinion is persuasive in ensuring that compensation doesn’t become so aligned with short-term gain rather than long-term incentive, which is why most people own stock in a company.
I think the president believes that there are steps that we can take to ensure that there are mechanisms in place, again, that bolster this notion of long-term incentive rather than short-term gain so that that doesn’t contribute to something like we’ve seen in this economic crisis.
TAPPER: Focusing on the publicly traded companies, you didn’t mention the push that Secretary Geithner mentioned today to have the compensation boards be more independent.
GIBBS: That’s another legislative thing that allows — like in Sarbanes-Oxley, with the independence of the accounting committees, this provides the independence for the compensation committee not to be connected with management, again, in order to set compensation that is outside of what we believe rewards that long-term incentive.
I think the president believes, rightly, that these two legislative efforts, in addition to the regulation surrounding the — around the Dodd amendment as well as what Mr. Feinberg is going to do are common sense reforms that will give people confidence in publicly traded companies.
Lastly, the president has supported, as a member of the Senate, and continues to support efforts that are non-binding shareholder efforts to provide — so that shareholders are empowered to provide some say on the — on the compensation for the managers for the companies for which they invest.
-jpt
Obama: 'Now Is the Time For Common Sense Action' 
Romney Takes Aim at Conservatives
I blame FOX NEWS They are always spreading Hatred firing up the right wing Extremist! Boycott Fox News!
Posted by: Angie in PA | June 10, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
Of course, you do Angie. We would expect nothing less from you.
Posted by: WhereWasThePress? | June 10, 2009, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
Angie
don’t you understand… these shooters have rights, you don’t want to infringe on their right t shoot people do you?
that last justice dept report was just an imaginary tale…..
Posted by: No Mas | June 10, 2009, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
^-║-^…Auh the gentle drum beat of left wind err wing extremist deflection of facts is ♫ to my ears…Try extreme hate groups of every variety is wrong period…..♥ Thy Neighbor
Posted by: Parallax View | June 10, 2009, 5:00 pm 5:00 pm
Fox news is the best for fair and balanced news. It has the most viewers, not just in the USA but around the world. Go into any restaurant or bar and they are playing Fox. A majority of people LOVE it. It’s where all the smart people get their news. Non smart people tend to watch the government run media, i.e. ABC, NBC, CBS, msnbc, CNN.
Posted by: marco | June 10, 2009, 5:00 pm 5:00 pm
“Fox news is the best for fair and balanced news.”
FoxNews leans right in its news coverage and is unabashedly right in their personality led shows.
“It has the most viewers,not just in the USA but around the world.”
It leads cable news.
Katie Couric (in last place among the networks) more than doubles their audience.
“It’s where all the smart people get their news.”
A survey found that FoxNews viewers were 4 times as likely as viewers of any other networks to believe things about Iraq which had been proven false.
The #1 news website? MSNBC.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 10, 2009, 5:18 pm 5:18 pm
It’s funny seeing all of the obomatrons getting scared now that their Messiah has been found out. Now, more and more Americans are seeing Barry for who he really is. Even totus, his ‘prompter can’t save him now. Quick, ryan c. put down that koolaid.
Posted by: marco | June 10, 2009, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
Mr Tapper, when are you going to challenge the “jobs saved or created” canard?? Bill McGurn’s WSJ piece yesterday indicted the major news organizations for buying that hook, line and sinker. Who is going to challenge that number??
Posted by: DonH | June 10, 2009, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
“Bill McGurn’s”
Former Bush speech writer and all around right wing toadie.
The whole column is whining by Tony Fratto.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 10, 2009, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
Ryan C , excuse me sir but where do you get this information ?? are you a polster ? media executive ? or a new administration Czar ? If you are not anyone of those mentioned above what makes you to believe that your perception sir is the truth ?? Ahh don’t tell me, it must be what Mr Kieth Olberman and his twin brother Rachel Maddow tell you ?? typical hateful,liberal bias. AMEN
Posted by: Frank | June 10, 2009, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
“Ryan C , excuse me sir but where do you get this information”
FoxNews averages about 2M viewers during primetime.
Katie Couric pulls in over 5M.
Nielsen ratings for news websites have MSNBC at #1
And the survey dealt with poeple being able to identify whether something about Iraq that had been proven false and separating them by their news source.
FoxNews viewers did the worst and were 4 times as likely to believe something that had been proven false as any other news source.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 10, 2009, 5:43 pm 5:43 pm
Greetings from serfdom. I agree with comrade Frank. I think Barry should appoint Ryan C. as the government run media czar. That way he can keep making up his facts like the white house is wont to do.
Posted by: marco | June 10, 2009, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
“That way he can keep making up his facts”
Sorry, but I don’t make up facts.
I leave that to right wing.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 10, 2009, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
“They did not dismiss information just because it comes from a non-liberal source.”
That was before conservative media decided partisanship, outrage and hot female news readers sold better than reasoned debate.
FoxNews as a source is worthless.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 10, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
Newsweek says Barry is a god. that’s news? Maybe only for the sheep and non smart, anti fox news minions. The state run media needs people to stay dumb.
Posted by: marco | June 10, 2009, 6:07 pm 6:07 pm
I could care less about partisan bickering or about what sells and what doesn’t sell, or about when facts are opinions and opinions facts, or about reasoned and unreasoned views. But I really think this notion of providing funds to companies as a funding backstop with nothing better defined as to costs and conditions than a hodge-podge of changing and alterable requirements set by whoever is in office is a bad recipe.
Supposedly there is a treasury credit term window now, which is supposed to operate like a reverse auction for bank debt. I hope that works the way it should, or something similar is put in place. One thing for sure, unless more Americans start getting a better handle on modern monetary infrastructure, more spoils will be going to the ‘higher-ups’. It’s not going to be enough to know simply that money is something you want. That just won’t be enough to preserve our liberty anymore.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 10, 2009, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm
Ryan C this is not about right or left wings.The issue is where is this country heading to ? How can you percieve the present administration is taking us on the right direction when the “leaders” change positions on everything.They can’t blame the past adm.for what they are doing.The defict is getting bigger , we owe money to China beyond our lifetime to repay and more jobs are going away. Where is the change ? Your views are as good as the Castro Regime views. I perceived that the current events such as the shooting at the recruiting office, the shooting at the museum and the doctor’s assasination is nothing but indicators of worst things coming our way and not a right or left issue. People are starting to loose their cool. Being one sided like you sir is just the proof of how polarized this country is becoming.
Posted by: Frank | June 10, 2009, 6:12 pm 6:12 pm
Try extreme hate groups of every variety is wrong period…..♥
Posted by: Parallax View
admirable sentiments indeed… perhaps you should have that conversation Republican Michelle Bachman who was advocating that her supporters take up arms against the government, to her, Republican hate and extremism is good and patriotic.
Don’t even get me started on Coulter, Savage, Rush, Malkin and the rest who want people to get armed and ‘do something’…
Posted by: 1776 | June 10, 2009, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm
this is not about right or left wings
Posted by: Frank
sure it is, when you have the NRA and crazy right wing media telling people that the government is coming to take away their guns, and then there’s a run on guns and ammo all over the country, when the Gov. of Texas shoots his mouth off about Texas taking things in their own hands and doing what’s best for Texas including secession,
and the right wing media becoming spokesmen for a violent seething hatred…
well, yes, it’s a right wing issue.
Posted by: 1776 | June 10, 2009, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm
1776 , Hate is hate it does not matter which way it comes. Don’t try to convince yourself that only conservatives are haters. Democrats have a lot account for too. Maybe you forgot the 60′s and who were in power then.Maybe you should know that the KKK was composed of mostly democrats. Robert Bird to mention one of them.Read a little about the history of this country and maybe will make you a little more humble.
Posted by: Frank | June 10, 2009, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm
Read a little about the history of this country and maybe will make you a little more humble.
Posted by: Frank
if you want to review all hate group history in America, go for it.. my post was about the current tirades from the right and the self justification for the violence coming from current representatives of the Republican party.
Funny in a way that you mention the KKK, as that was just another example of recent Republican extreme rantings about Sotomayor.
Posted by: 1776 | June 10, 2009, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm
“Maybe you should know that the KKK was composed of mostly democrats”
And 40 years later, its dominated by right wing nut jobs.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 10, 2009, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
1776 , haven’t you finished with you garble yet ? What freakin cave you came from ? The 2nd ammedment is protect the people from the government sir, not the crooks ! No one is inciting anyone to go and destroy the Republic ! are you insane ?? Texas is free to leave the Union if they desire to do so but very unlikely, come on ! get a hold of yourself !! Economic pressure will cause a lot discordance and probably spots of violence and with the help of the polarizing people like you sir things can get out of hands. So it is not just the Rush and Coulters and Hannities but also the Olbermans, Carliles and Maddows on the other side. It is up to you if want to become a puppet sir..geee..Take a coffee break guy..come on..
Posted by: Frank | June 10, 2009, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm
how about those black panthers in PA? They just wanted say hi to the voters right? They wouldn’t intimidate voters now would they? Robert Bird was the Grand Lizard in the clan. Funny how democrats like and support these groups. But it’s OK because after all, they are democrats too. Like with ACORN, they keep it in the family.
Posted by: marco | June 10, 2009, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
The 2nd ammedment is protect the people from the government sir, not the crooks ! No one is inciting anyone to go and destroy the Republic Posted by: Frank
obviously you’ve not been reading (R) Michelle Bachman’s recent comments…
re: “The 2nd ammedment is protect the people from the government sir,”
thank you for making my point…
re:” Olbermans, Carliles and Maddows on the other side. ”
maybe you can point to something concrete they said that equals the hate from the right-wing.
Posted by: 1776 | June 10, 2009, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm
1776 I giving up on you. There is no worst blind than the one that does not want to see.Go back to your cave and live well.
Posted by: Frank | June 10, 2009, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm
“Maybe you should know that the KKK was composed of mostly democrats”
And 40 years later, its dominated by right wing nut jobs.
Posted by: Ryan C |
——————-
and the democrats are dominated by left wing nut jobs.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | June 10, 2009, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
I think the one thing all of these shooters had in common is that they are nutjobs.
Posted by: andylancaster | June 10, 2009, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm
The other thing about modern monetary systems is that knowledge and control of money and knowledge and control of conflict, foreign or domestic, often run together. Knowledge of monetary systems, knowledge of history. It’s every man for himself when it comes to getting knowledge of the kind that preserves liberty and security.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 10, 2009, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
Curiouser and curiouser!
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 10, 2009, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm
The rhetorical and political attacks on right-wing ‘extremists’ by left-wing
‘extremist’ politicians, activists, media outlets and bloggers are creating
the environments for the very things they fear. The same is true with the
right’s rhetorical and political attacks on the left.
If both sides don’t stop and take a deep breath and think about the
consequences of their own words and deeds, open violence and civil war are
inevitable.
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel | June 10, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
Katie Couric has high ratings because her viewers are too feeble to change the channel.. they watch the same channel 24/7.. some are just ‘urban amish’…
..once they can’t hook up their converter boxes.. her ratings will tank completely..
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 10, 2009, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm
Many of us nutjobs are too lazy to stalk or become violent.
Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | June 10, 2009, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm
Warren Bonesteel: “If both sides don’t stop and take a deep breath and think about the consequences of their own words and deeds, open violence and civil war are inevitable.”
I’ve always found that if a person has it in them to seek violence, they’ll find it, and if they have it in them to seek resolutions, nothing will stop them. For example, I have it in me to seek knowledge, and knowledge disperses knowledge. Those prone to violence and destruction take new knowledge as a call to violence and destruction. Those prone to resolve and improvement take new knowledge as a call to resolve and improvement. The truth brings out the best of everyone.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 10, 2009, 9:40 pm 9:40 pm
The truth brings out the best of everyone.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth
while I understand your point in general,
‘truth’ has a way varying from culture to culture, religion to religion, political party to political party, century to century.
The D.C. shooter knew the ‘truth’ as did the murderer of Dr. Tillman and the shooter in Arkansas.
Our valiant troops fight for the ‘truth’ that they know.
We have heard conflicting ‘truths’ on the torture issue from both political parties.
What new ‘truth’ will be revealed tomorrow.
Posted by: Oh Yeah | June 10, 2009, 11:14 pm 11:14 pm
Oh Yeah- Most people look for the ‘truth’ as a final point…an end and a termination of debate. In that way, people say, “Oh, well, that’s just your opinion, not a fact,” as if a ‘fact’ is an end. But a fact is always someone’s opinion. To look for that kind of end-point is like seeking death.
The truth that I talk about is when people learn, maybe for the first time, that there is more to learn, always more to learn. That is like life and eternal. It is also difficult to control.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 10, 2009, 11:24 pm 11:24 pm
The truth that I talk about is when people learn, maybe for the first time, that there is more to learn, always more to learn
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth
the learning you mention, plus experience, might lead to wisdom, to hear and consider other points of view without the need to be ‘right’, or being on the ‘correct side’ of an issue.
Posted by: Oh Yeah | June 10, 2009, 11:37 pm 11:37 pm
But a fact is always someone’s opinion.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth
without trying to play semantic games, I would suggest that a ‘fact’ such as
someone dies, and is still dead 20 minutes later, the dead body is not an opinion, but a fact…… the cause of death might be open to opinion.
Posted by: Oh Yeah | June 10, 2009, 11:44 pm 11:44 pm
Those are two errors that new learners make.
The first is that there is no need to be certain of anything, which is false. You must always be cetain of your position, until you are defeated, in which case you learn something.
The second is that a ‘fact’ is essentially different than an ‘opinion’. There is no difference essentially, but a difference in degree of certainty that you maintain the premise. Hypothetically, based on your experience, you would be certain that a man laying on the ground, cold and with no pulse is dead. But what then, if it is shown to be a theatrical or medicinal trick of some kind, or what if all of your previous experience is proven not to follow, and the man suddenly arises? Then your certainty would vanish.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 10, 2009, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm
But you might still give me some hypothetical case in which you would be ‘absolutely certain’ of some ‘fact’.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 10, 2009, 11:55 pm 11:55 pm
And to be certain of your position does not mean in some half-hearted way, trying to bend the truth to win an argument, but whole-heartedly, fighting to discern between the true and the false, comparing the similarities and differences of the attributes of the terms in question, and how they are used.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 11, 2009, 12:00 am 12:00 am
Hypothetically
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth
but I am not speaking hypothetically, a dead body is neither true nor false, nor opinion, it is in fact, dead, needing no philosophical underpinnings, or debatable attributes, simply dead…..beyond that fact, all things can be considered.
I can see a long night of discussion over beverages of choice should we ever meet.
Posted by: Oh Yeah | June 11, 2009, 2:01 am 2:01 am
Jake’s question to Gibbs re: how the Obama Administration chooses to sound off on one homegrown act of terrorism/ violence or another is pretty insensitive.
There are some sensitive instances especially when lives are ended by the viles acts of another which require intelligent reflection and are not a place to attach one’s media spin.
Posted by: clarity | June 11, 2009, 2:25 am 2:25 am
OhYeah- This is a big problem that modern academics face. But no matter how you describe a ‘dead body’, you are speaking hypothetically (I hope).
You have an ideal in your mind of what a ‘dead body’ is, which is the principle drawn from all of your previous experiences, through your senses and through communications. This is what you call ‘dead-in-fact’. But it is an idea.
It is not that you and I could not agree, hypothetically, that there is such a thing as a dead person. But the definition and the certainty of the ‘fact’ is so uncertain, that it usually takes a physician and a sherrif/coroner to define it for the law. That’s simply the nature of ‘facts’. They are in every case opinions, no matter how much any individual or any group is certain of them.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 11, 2009, 11:06 am 11:06 am
And that probably isn’t the best example, given the article, unless it’s used to demonstrate the fact that emotions are part of the politics of choices of topics for public discussions.
Posted by: MarkLeavenworth | June 11, 2009, 11:55 am 11:55 am