Esteban Gonzalez Pons: 'Europe is not a market, it is the will to live together', speech on Brexit, European Parliament - 2017

25 March 2017, European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium

Europe is currently bound to the North by popularism, and to the South by refugees drowned in the sea. To the east by Putin's tanks, and to the West by Trump's wall. In the past by war, in the future by Brexit. Today, Europe is alone more than ever, but it's citizens do not know it.

Europe is, however, for that reason the best solution and we do not know how to explain that to our citizens. Globalisation teaches us that today Europe is inevitable, there is no alternative.

But Brexit also tells us that Europe is reversible, that you can walk backwards in history, eve4n though outside of Europe, it is very cold.

Brexit is the most selfish decision ever made since Winston Churchill saved Europe  with the blood sweat and tears of the English.

Saying Brexit is the most insidious way of saying goodbye.

Europe is not a market, it is the will to live together. Leaving Europe is not leaving a market, it is leaving shared dreams. We can have a common market, but if we do not have common dreams, we have nothing. Europe is the peace that came after the disaster of war. Europe is the pardon between French and Germans. Europe is the return to freedom of Greece, Spain and Portugal. Europe is the fall of the Berlin Wall. Europe is the end of communism. Europe is the welfare state, it is democracy.

Aneurin (Nye) Bevan: 'Get out! Get out! Get out!', Suez Crisis, Trafalgar Square speech - 1956

4 November 1956, Trafalgar Square, London.

It is a sad sad sad story that is unfolding itself before our eyes at the present time. I very very sad one indeed. I myself feel despondent, really despondent, about the situation into which we have been got. When some young Tory’s say, ‘oh, we are giving the lead,’ the lead to where!

Yes, the lead back to chaos, back to anarchy, and back to universal destruction.

That’s not the lead we want.

This policy of the British government is a policy of bankruptcy and despair. It’s not the policy of civilisation.

They’re hoping that the military situation in Egypt will soon resolve itself, and that we will be ‘militarily successful ‘. If we are successful, what will that prove? It will only prove that we are stronger than the Egyptians. It won’t prove that weare right. It’s only the logic of the bully, many Tory  newspapers are saying today, ‘oh well, perhaps we are judging too soon?’ ‘It may be that (PM) Eden will get it all over with, and then we can breathe a sigh of relief.’

That’s what the Germans said about Hitler! They said, ‘he may be a liar, but will he be a successful liar? They said, he’s a bully, but will he be a successful bully? They were perfectly prepared to accept his morality, so long as he gives them the prizes.

But yeah, we must look further into this.

We are stronger than Egypt but there are other countries stronger than us. Are we prepared to accept for ourselves the logic we are applying to Egypt? If nations more powerful than ourselves accept the absence of principle, the anarchistic attitude of Eden and launch bombs on London, what answer have we got, what complaint have we got? If we are going to appeal to force, if force is to be the arbiter to which we appeal, it would at least make common sense to try to make sure beforehand that we have got it, even if you accept that abysmal logic, that decadent point of view.

We are in fact in the position today of having appealed to force in the case of a small nation, where if it is appealed to against us it will result in the destruction of Great Britain, not only as a nation, but as an island containing living men and women. Therefore I say to Anthony, I say to the British government, there is no count at all upon which they can be defended.

They have besmirched the name of Britain. They have made us ashamed of the things of which formerly we were proud. They have offended against every principle of decency and there is only way in which they can even begin to restore their tarnished reputation and that is to get out! Get out! Get out!

Aneurin (Nye) Bevan: 'The social furniture of modern society is so complicated and fragile that it cannot support the jackboot.'', Suez Crisis - 1956

5 December 1956, House of Commons, United Kingdom

The speech to which we have just listened is the last of a long succession that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has made to the House in the last few months and, if I may be allowed to say so, I congratulate him upon having survived so far. He appears to be in possession of vigorous health, which is obviously not enjoyed by all his colleagues, and he appears also to be exempted from those Freudian lapses which have distinguished the speeches of the Lord Privy Seal, and therefore he has survived so far with complete vigour.

However, I am bound to say that the speech by the right hon. Gentleman today carries the least conviction of all.

I have been looking through the various objectives and reasons that the Government have given to the House of Commons for making war on Egypt, and it really is desirable that when a nation makes war upon another nation it should be quite clear why it does so. It should not keep changing the reasons as time goes on.

There is, in fact, no correspondence whatsoever between the reasons given today and the reasons set out by the Prime Minister at the beginning. The reasons have changed all the time. I have got a list of them here, and for the sake of the record I propose to read it. I admit that I found some difficulty in organising a speech with any coherence because of the incoherence of the reasons. They are very varied.

On 30th October, the Prime Minister said that the purpose was, first, "to seek to separate the combatants"; second, "to remove the risk to free passage through the Canal".

The speech we have heard today is the first speech in which that subject has been dropped. Every other statement made on this matter since the beginning has always contained a reference to the future of the Canal as one of Her Majesty's Government's objectives, in fact, as an object of war, to coerce Egypt. Indeed, that is exactly what honourable and right honourable Gentlemen opposite believed it was all about.

Honourable Members do not do themselves justice. One does not fire in order merely to have a cease-fire. One would have thought that the cease-fire was consequent upon having fired in the first place. It could have been accomplished without starting. The other objective set out on 30th October was "to reduce the risk ... to those voyaging through the Canal." - [OFFICIAL REPORT, 30th October, 1956; Vol. 558. c. 1347.]

We have heard from the right honourable and learned Gentleman today a statement which I am quite certain all the world will read with astonishment. He has said that when we landed in Port Said there was already every reason to believe that both Egypt and Israel had agreed to cease fire.

The Minister shakes his head. If he will recollect what his right honourable and learned friend said, it was that there was still a doubt about the Israeli reply. Are we really now telling this country and the world that all these calamitous consequences have been brought down upon us merely because of a doubt? That is what he said.

Surely, there was no need. We had, of course, done the bombing, but our ships were still going through the Mediterranean. We had not arrived at Port Said. The exertions of the United Nations had already gone far enough to be able to secure from Israel and Egypt a promise to cease fire, and all that remained to be cleared up was an ambiguity about the Israeli reply. In these conditions, and against the background of these events, the invasion of Egypt still continued.

In the history of nations, there is no example of such frivolity. When I have looked at this chronicle of events during the last few days, with every desire in the world to understand it, I just have not been able to understand, and do not yet understand, the mentality of the Government. If the right honourable and learned Gentleman wishes to deny what I have said, I will give him a chance of doing so. If his words remain as they are now, we are telling the nation and the world that, having decided upon the course, we went on with it despite the fact that the objective we had set ourselves had already been achieved, namely, the separation of the combatants.

As to the objective of removing the risk to free passage through the Canal, I must confess that I have been astonished at this also. We sent an ultimatum to Egypt by which we told her that unless she agreed to our landing Ismailia, Suez and Port Said, we should make war upon her. We knew very well, did we not, that Nasser could not possibly comply? Did we really believe that Nasser was going to give in at once? Is our information from Egypt so bad that we did not know that an ultimatum of that sort was bound to consolidate his position in Egypt and in the whole Arab worId?

We knew at that time, on 29th and 30th October, that long before we could have occupied Port Said, Ismailia and Suez, Nasser would have been in a position to make his riposte. So wonderfully organised was this expedition - which, apparently, has been a miracle of military genius - that long after we had delivered our ultimatum and bombed Port Said, our ships were still ploughing through the Mediterranean, leaving the enemy still in possession of all the main objectives which we said we wanted.

Did we really believe that Nasser was going to wait for us to arrive? He did what anybody would have thought he would do, and if the Government did not think he would do it, on that account alone they ought to resign. He sank ships in the Canal, the wicked man. What did hon. Gentlemen opposite expect him to do? The result is that, in fact, the first objective realised was the opposite of the one we set out to achieve; the Canal was blocked, and it is still blocked.

The only other interpretation of the Government's mind is that they expected, for some reason or other, that their ultimatum would bring about disorder in Egypt and the collapse of the Nasser regime. None of us believed that. If honourable Gentlemen opposite would only reason about other people as they reason amongst themselves, they would realise that a Government cannot possibly surrender to a threat of that sort and keep any self-respect. We should not, should we? If somebody held a pistol at our heads and said, "You do this or we fire", should we? Of course not. Why on earth do not honourable Members opposite sometimes believe that other people have the same courage and independence as they themselves possess? Nasser behaved exactly as any reasonable man would expect him to behave.

The other objective was "to reduce the risk ... to those voyaging through the Canal." That was a rhetorical statement, and one does not know what it means. I am sorry the right honourable Gentleman the Prime Minister is not here. I appreciate why he is not here, but it is very hard to reply to him when he is not in the House, and I hope honourable Members opposite will acquit me of trying to attack him in his absence.

On 31st October, the Prime Minister said that our object was to secure a lasting settlement and to protect our nationals. What do we think of that? In the meantime, our nationals were living in Egypt while we were murdering Egyptians at Port Said. We left our nationals in Egypt at the mercy of what might have been merciless riots throughout the whole country, with no possibility whatever of our coming to their help. We were still voyaging through the Mediterranean, after having exposed them to risk by our own behaviour. What does the House believe that the country will think when it really comes to understand all this?

On 1st November, we were told the reason was "to stop hostilities" and "prevent a resumption of them". - [OFFICIAL REPORT, 1st November, 1956; Vol. 558, c. 1653.]

But hostilities had already been practically stopped. On 3rd November, our objectives became much more ambitious - "to deal with all the outstanding problems in the Middle East". - [OFFICIAL REPORT, 3rd November. 1956; Vol. 558, c. 1867.]

In the famous book Madame Bovary, there is a story of a woman who goes from one sin to another, a long story of moral decline. In this case, our ambitions soar the farther away we are from realising them. Our objective was "to deal with all the outstanding problems in the Middle East".

After having outraged our friends, after having insulted the United States, after having affronted all our friends in the Commonwealth, after having driven the whole of the Arab world into one solid phalanx, at least for the moment, behind Nasser, we were then going to deal with all the outstanding problems in the Middle East.

He said that if the United Nations would send forces to relieve us no one would be better pleased than we.

It was only a few weeks ago in this house that honourable and right honourable Gentlemen opposite sneered at every mention of the United Nations. We will deal with that.

The next objective of which we were told was to ensure that the Israeli forces withdrew from Egyptian territory. That, I understand, is what we were there for. We went into Egyptian territory in order to establish our moral right to make the Israelis clear out of Egyptian territory. That is a remarkable war aim, is it not? In order that we might get Israel out, we went in. To establish our case before the eyes of the world, Israel being the wicked invader, we, of course, being the nice friend of Egypt, went to protect her from the Israelis. But, unfortunately, we had to bomb the Egyptians first.

On 6th November, the Prime Minister said: "The action we took has been an essential condition for ... a United Nations Force to come into the Canal Zone itself." - [OFFlCIAL REPORT. 6th November. 1956; Vol. 559, c. 80.]

That is one of the most remarkable claims of all, and it is one of the main claims made by right honourable and honourable Members opposite. It is, of course, exactly the same claim which might have been made, if they had thought about it in time, by Mussolini and Hitler, that they made war on the world in order to call the United Nations into being. If it were possible for bacteria to argue with each other, they would be able to say that of course their chief justification was the advancement of medical science.

As The Times has pointed out, the arrival of the United Nations force could not be regarded as a war aim by the Government; it called it, "an inadvertence". That is not my description: it is The Times. It was a by-product of the action not of Her Majesty's Government but of the United Nations itself.

Let me ask honourable Members opposite to listen to this case. The right honourable and learned Gentleman was spending most of his time in America trying to persuade the United States - that is after we were in Egypt - to make the control of the Canal one of the conditions of our withdrawal.

On Thursday last he himself said here: "I mention these facts to the House because, obviously, the build-up of this force must have important relationship to a phased withdrawal of our own and the French troops. There are, however, other important matters be considered, such as the speedy clearance of the Canal, and negotiation of a final settlement with regard to the operation of the Canal." - [OFFICIAL REPORT. 29th November, 56; Vol 561. c. 582.]

On every single occasion - and honourable Members opposite expected this - when he went upstairs to tell his honourable Friends that he had come back empty-handed, what did they say? Why did we start this operation? We started this operation in order to give Nasser a black eye - if we could to overthrow him - but, in any case, to secure control of the Canal.

The United Nations force was in Egypt as a result of a Resolution of the United Nations for the purposes of the Charter. All along, the United States and all the other nations attached to the United Nations resolutely refused to allow the future of the Canal to be tied up with the existence of the Force. But the right honourable and learned Gentleman, in order to have some trophy to wave in the faces of his hon. Friends, wanted to bring from across the Atlantic an undertaking which would have destroyed the United Nations, because if the United Nations had agreed that the future of the Canal should also be contingent upon the withdrawal of British troops, then the United Nations force would no longer have been a United Nations force but an instrument of the rump of the United Nations, that is, the Western Powers.

I put it again to the right honourable and learned Gentleman that if honourable Members opposite had succeeded in what they wanted to do, they would have ruined the United Nations, because the very essence of the United Nations force is that it is not attempting to impose upon Egypt any settlement of the Canal.

I hope that honourable Members opposite will realise that the argument is a really serious one. It was seen to be so serious by the United States that, despite what I believe to be the desire on the part of a very large number of Americans to help us in these difficulties, it was clear to President Eisenhower, as it should be clear to anybody, that a settlement of that sort was bound to be resented by the whole of the Arab world and Egypt.

It was bound to be resented by the Commonwealth because it would make it appear that Her Majesty's Government were using the United Nations to obtain an objective that we set ourselves as far back as last August. Therefore, if the right honourable and learned Gentleman had succeeded, if the future of the Canal had been tied up with our withdrawal, the United Nations Force in Egypt would no longer have been a police force for the world, but would have been a means of coercing Egypt to accept our terms about the Canal.

Of course, is known to honourable Members in all parts of the House. They may have their own explanations for it, but I was not anxious to add to the burden of my argument. That fact is known. Of course, the Government did not support the United Nations Force - we all know that. Nevertheless, in this retrospective exercise that we are having from the other side of the House, it is possible for us to deal with the seriousness of the whole case.

The right honourable and learned Gentleman is sufficiently aware of the seriousness of it to start his speech today with collusion. If collusion can be established, the whole fabric of the Government's case falls to the ground, and they know this. It is the most serious of all the charges. It is believed in the United States and it is believed by large numbers of people in Great Britain that we were well aware that Israel was going to make the attack on Egypt. In fact, very few of the activities at the beginning of October are credible except upon the assumption that the French and British governments knew that something was going to happen in Egypt.

Indeed, the right honourable and learned Gentleman has not been frank with the House. We have asked him over and over again. He has said, "Ah, we did not conspire with France and Israel." We never said that the Government might have conspired. What we said was that they might have known about it. The right honourable and learned Gentleman gave the House the impression that at no time had he ever warned Israel against attack on Egypt. Even today, he hinged the warning we gave to Jordan on the possibility of the other Arab States being involved in any attack on Jordan.

We understand from the right honourable and learned Gentleman that at no time did the Government warn Israel against an attack on Egypt. If we apprehend trouble of these dimensions - we are not dealing with small matters - if we apprehend that the opening phases of a third world war might start or turn upon an attack by Israel on anyone, why did we not make it quite clear to Israel that we would take the same view of an attack on Egypt as we took of an attack on Jordan?

The fact is that all these long telephone conversations and conferences between M. Guy Mollet, M. Pineau and the Prime Minister are intelligible only on the assumption that something was being cooked up. All that was left to do, as far as we knew from the facts at that time, was to pick up negotiations at Geneva about the future of the Canal, as had been arranged by the United Nations. But all the time there was this coming and going between ourselves and the French Government. Did the French know? It is believed in France that the French knew about the Israeli intention. If the French knew, did they tell the British Government? We would like to know. Did M. Guy Mollet, on 16th October, tell the British Prime Minister that he expected that there was to be an attack on Egypt? Every circumstantial fact that we know points to that conclusion. For instance, Mr Ben Gurion, the Israeli Prime Minister, had already made it clear in the Knesset on several occasions that Israel regarded Egypt as the real enemy, and not Jordan. Therefore, a warning not to attack Jordan was not relevant. At the same time, many Israelis were saying that at last Israel had got a reliable friend.

What happened? Did Marianne take John Bull to an unknown rendezvous? Did Marianne say to John Bull that there was a forest fire going to start, and did John Bull then say, "We ought to put it out," but Marianne said, "No, let us warm our hands by it. It is a nice fire"? Did Marianne deceive John Bull or seduce him?

Now, of course, we come to the ultimate end. It is at the end of all these discussions that the war aim of the Government now becomes known. Of course, we knew it all the time. We knew where they would land. After this long voyaging, getting almost wrecked several times, they have come to safe harbour. It was a red peril all the time. It was Russia all the time. It was not to save the Canal. The honourable Member who interjected has been deceived all the time. It was not the Canal, it was the red peril which they had unmasked. The Government suspected it before, said the right honourable and learned Gentleman, about the arms to Egypt. We on this side knew it - we did not suspect it - but the right honourable and learned Gentleman suspected it, so he said, at the very time when he was informing the House that he thought there was a proper balance of arms between Egypt and Israel.

What will the Israelis think of this when they read the right honourable and learned Gentleman's words, or are we to understand that the Israelis have got as many arms as the Egyptians have? We understand that they were fully armed all the time, because the right honourable and learned Gentleman suspected that the Egyptians had these arms.

I am not in the least surprised by this situation. That the Russians have provided these arms to the Egyptians we accept - of course they did. It is a curious thing - I may be frivolous, but I am not frightened by it - and I will tell the House why. The Russians have a habit, curiously enough, it seems to me, of not knowing what is happening in other nations. They do not even know what is happening in Poland or Hungary, and it does not seem to have occurred to the Russians that there was no military advantage in providing weapons that the Egyptians could not use.

The fact of the matter is that these great modern weapons are practically useless in the hands of backward nations. [HONOURABLE MEMBERS: "There were the volunteers."] But there were no volunteers. Do not, however, let honourable Members push the argument too far. I am not for one moment seeking to justify the Russian supply of arms to Egypt. I think it was a wicked thing to do and I think it is an equally wicked thing for us to supply arms. That area is much too combustible, far too inflammatory. This is now the end of 1956, when very many things have happened in the Middle East, when it is more dangerous than ever. I think that the Russians ought not to have done it and I will say further that I think that Nasser ought not to have invited them.

It seems to me - and here I probably shall carry honourable Members opposite with me - that Nasser has not been behaving in the spirit of the Bandoeng Conference which he joined, because what he did was not to try to reduce the temperature of the cold war: what he did was to exploit it for Egyptian purposes. Therefore, Nasser's hands are not clean by any means. I have said this before. I said it in Trafalgar Square. We must not believe that because the Prime Minister is wrong, Nasser is right. That is not the view of this side of the House.

What has deeply offended us is that such wrongs as Nasser has done and such faults as he has have been covered by the bigger blunders of the British Government. That is what vexes us. We are satisfied that the arts of diplomacy would have brought Nasser to where we wanted to get him, which was to agree about the free passage of ships through the Canal, on the civilised ground that a riparian nation has got no absolute rights over a great waterway like the Canal. That is a principle which has been accepted by India and by America and by most other nations. We have never taken the position that in the exercise of sovereign rights Egypt has the right to inflict a mortal wound upon the commerce of the world.

Do not let honourable Members now bring to the forefront of the argument the fact that Egypt had not been allowing Israeli ships to go through the Canal. If they thought so much of the seriousness of that, why did they not even invite Israel to the conference? It is not good enough to bring these things forward all the time as though they were the main objectives. Of course, we take the view that Egypt should permit the ships of all nations to pass through the Canal, and we hope that that objective will still be insisted upon. We are satisfied that those objectives could have been realised by negotiation. Not only have they not been realised by the action taken by the Government, but the opposite has been realised.

It has been clear to us, and it is now becoming clear to the nation, that for many months past honourable Members opposite have been harbouring designs of this sort. One of the reasons why we could not get a civilised solution of the Cyprus problem was that the Government were harbouring designs to use Cyprus in the Middle East, unilaterally or in conjunction with France. Whenever we put in this House questions to the right honourable Gentleman asking him why he did not answer whether he wanted a base on Cyprus or Cyprus as a base, he answered quite frankly that we might want to activate the base on Cyprus independently of our allies. That was the answer. Well, we have activated it - and look at us. We have had all these murders and all this terror, we have had all this unfriendship over Cyprus between ourselves and Greece, and we have been held up to derision in all the world merely because we contemplated using Cyprus as a base for going it alone in the Middle East. And we did go it alone. Look at the result.

Was it not obvious to honourable Members opposite that Great Britain could not possibly engage in a major military adventure without involving our N.A.T.O allies? Was it not very clear, if we did contemplate any adventure at all, that it would have to be in conjunction with them? No. It is a sad and a bitter story. We hope that at least one beneficial by-product of it will be a settlement of the Cyprus question very soon indeed.

Now I would conclude by saying this. I do not believe that any of us yet - I say any of us yet - have realised the complete change that has taken place in the relationship between nations and between Governments and peoples. These were objectives, I do beg honourable Members to reflect, that were not realisable by the means that we adopted. These civil, social and political objectives in modern society are not attainable by armed force.

Even if we had occupied Egypt by armed force we could not have secured the freedom of passage through the Canal. It is clear that there is such xenophobia, that there is such passion, that there is such bitter feeling against Western imperialism - rightly or wrongly: I am not arguing the merits at the moment - among millions of people that they are not prepared to keep the arteries of European commerce alive and intact if they themselves want to cut them. We could not keep ships going through the Canal. The Canal is too easily sabotaged, if Egypt wants to sabotage it. Why on earth did we imagine that the objectives could be realised in that way in the middle of the twentieth century?

Exactly the same thing is true of the Russians in Hungary. The Russians in Hungary are attempting to achieve civil, social and political objectives by tanks and guns, and the Hungarian people are demonstrating that it cannot be done.

The social furniture of modern society is so complicated and fragile that it cannot support the jackboot. We cannot run the processes of modern society by attempting to impose our will upon nations by armed force. If we have not learned that we have learned nothing. Therefore, from our point of view here, whatever may have been the morality of the Government's action - and about that there is no doubt - there is no doubt about its imbecility. There is not the slightest shadow of doubt that we have attempted to use methods which were bound to destroy the objectives we had, and, of course, this is what we have discovered.

I commend to honourable Members, if they have not seen it, a very fine cartoon in Punch by IIlingworth and called "Desert Victory." There we see a black, ominous, sinister background and a pipeline broken, pouring oil into the desert sands. How on earth do honourable Members opposite imagine that hundreds of miles of pipeline can be kept open if the Arabs do not want it to be kept open? It is not enough to say that there are large numbers of Arabs who want the pipeline to be kept open because they live by it.

It has been proved over and over again now in the modern world that men and women are often prepared to put up with material losses for things that they really think worth while. It has been shown in Budapest, and it could be shown in the Middle East. That is why I beg honourable Members to turn their backs on this most ugly chapter and realise that if we are to live in the world and are to be regarded as a decent nation, decent citizens in the world, we have to act up to different standards than the one that we have been following in the last few weeks.

I resent most bitterly this unconcern for the lives of innocent men and women. It may be that the dead in Port Said are 100, 200 or 300. If it is only one, we had no business to take it. Do honourable Members begin to realise how this is going to revolt the world when it passes into the imagination of men and women everywhere, and in this country, that we, with eight million here in London, the biggest single civilian target in the world, with our crowded island exposed, as no nation in the world is exposed, to the barbarism of modern weapons, we ourselves set the example.

We ourselves conscript our boys and put guns and aeroplanes in their hands and say, "Bomb there." Really, this is so appalling that human language can hardly describe it. And for what? The Government resorted to epic weapons for squalid and trivial ends, and that is why all through this unhappy period Ministers - all of them - have spoken and argued and debated well below their proper form - because they have been synthetic villains. They are not really villains. They have only set off on a villainous course, and they cannot even use the language of villainy.

Therefore, in conclusion, I say that it is no use honourable Members consoling themselves that they have more support in the country than many of them feared they might have. Of course they have support in the country. They have support among many of the unthinking and unreflective who still react to traditional values, who still think that we can solve all these problems in the old ways. Of course they have. Not all the human race has grown to adult state yet. But do not let them take comfort in that thought. The right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W Churchill) has warned them before. In the first volume of his Second WorId War, he writes about the situation before the war and he says this: "Thus an Administration more disastrous than any in our history saw all its errors and shortcomings acclaimed by the nation. There was however a bill to be paid, and it took the new House of Commons nearly ten years to pay it."

It will take us very many years to live down what we have done. It will take us many years to pay the price. I know that tomorrow evening hon. and right honourable Members will probably, as they have done before, give the Government a vote of confidence, but they know in their heart of hearts that it is a vote which the Government do not deserve.

· Extracted from Hansard 5th December 1956. Columns 1268 - 1283

Aneurin (Nye) Bevan: 'Now private enterprise cannot build houses to last', Public Housing speech - 1946

Aneurin (Nye) Bevan was a socialist leaning member of the Labour Party who was Health Minister post war in the Atlee government. He is the most significant figure in the history of the NHS, Britain's national health care program. This speech is about housing policy.

London, 1946

Mister Chairman, and comrades, the last time that I spoke in this hall was when I was leading an [inaudible] demonstration. It was a most unorthodox affair frowned upon by large numbers of respectable persons. You fellas have gone right mad now these days. This is a nuisance. But nevertheless the task that lies ahead of us is far greater than what we have already accomplished. We want to get those 45,550 families back into their homes as quickly as possible, because we want to get those 140,000 building workers on clean straightforward jobs of new building. Now I know Mister Chairman, dribbling about in a war damaged house is not a very satisfying job for a craftsman, and the sooner we can put this behind us the better. Comparisons are being made at the present time with the housing policy in different parts of the country. Our critics, and there are a good many of them, are going to be confounded.

At the end of the last war no houses at all were being built, yet we have got, as I said, throughout the country as a whole, not only to replace the consequences of a destruction of war, not only to put up the houses that Hitler's bombs blew down. Not only have we got to repair the houses that were damaged, not only have we to make up the arrears of six years of lack of housing maintenance, but in addition to that, in addition to what the enemy did to us, we have got to try and make up for the arrears of housing left by 50 years of Tory misrule in Britain.

A house is at the end of the production line, not the beginning. A house is the last product. Before you can start building on any scale, every single industry in society has got to be organised and stimulated into production. A house, a modern house, is a most complex economic production. Every single industry is a contributor. Not only the simple building materials of bricks and mortar and cement and plasterboards and slates, and tiles, and timber, but every single component and all the furnishings of a house make it built upon every single conceivable industry. And therefore before we can start houses going up in any great numbers, all these industries have got to be manned and organised, and it is to that task that I have been devoting myself during the winter months.

It was my purpose, and it is still my purpose, to try and get houses started everywhere so that as the men come home from the forces, some building work should be going on near their homes, because we want to try and make it possible for all the building operatives to do their building work and get back to their own homes at a reasonable hour. That purpose can only ... [skip]

We don't know what they are doing, where they are doing it, or how they are doing it. How is it going to be possible for the government to plan the production of all 101 components of a house unless we know what the contractors are doing, and therefore I made up my mind. As this plan had to be implemented to a plannable instrument, that the only plannable instrument lying ready to hand were the great public authorities. And so I decided to place the principle responsibility for the main features of the housing programme upon the public authorities. And there was a further reason.

Now private enterprise cannot build houses to last, because you don't make money that way. Private enterprise makes profit out of houses only when it builds houses to sell, and therefore as the primary consideration was to provide houses to let poor people, or for relatively poor people, then again the only instrument able to build houses to let in good numbers are the local authorities. And there was another ...[skip]

And that competitor is a black market in building repairs. Now repairs have to be done, as I said, because there are great arrears to be made up. A licence is obtained by a building contractor who enters a house, and then all sorts of things happen from then on. All sorts of things that I could describe if I had time, and that you could tell me about. Now comrades, that isn't good enough. That isn't good enough. There is a sacred obligation upon every building worker to refuse to engage ... [skip]

Our housing prices have got to be brought under control ...

Hasan Minhaj: "There are 294 sitting members of Congress that have accepted contributions from the NRA", RTCA Dinner - 2015

Hasan Minhaj is a Daily Show correspondent. This was delivered in the aftermath of the horrific mass shotting at a gay nightclub in Orlando. The full speech is above and very funny. The excerpted text relates to gun violence.

What we saw in Orlando was one of the ugliest cocktails of the problems that we still see here in America. A cocktail of homophobia, xenophobia, lack of access to mental healthcare, and sheer lack of political will. And all of us satirists, we’ve all been yelling out, crying out, for change. But the sad reality is that we are all complicit in what happened. Every day in our workplaces, in our homes, in our religious institutions, there is covert or overt discrimination or phobia towards people of different religious, racial, or sexual walks of life. And we just sit there and we let it happen because it doesn’t affect our bottom line.

“I didn’t say it Hasan. I don’t think it that’s way. They said it, okay. It’s not that simple Hasan.”

And we just go on with our lives because it did not affect our status quo. And the sad reality is that stuff like this is going to continue to happen unless we recognise that civil liberties are an all or nothing game. A rising tide lifts all boats, it’s not pick or choose. So whether you like it or not we all have to step up and fight for each other, otherwise the whole thing is a sham. And until we do that, hijabis are going to get harassed in the streets, members from the trans community are going to be demonised for using the bathroom. And my brothers and sisters in the African American community, their spines are going to continue to get shattered in the backs of paddy wagons until we stand up and say something.

And the thing that hurts me the most is I wished I would have done more. To my brothers and sisters in the LGBTQ community and every marginalised community, I am sorry I did not do more. And the same goes for Congress. We look to you guys as our leaders. You make almost $200,000 a year to write rules, to make our society better. Not tweet, not tell us about your thoughts and prayers. To write rules to make our society better. And ultimately it comes down to money and influence. And right now, since 1998 the NRA has given $3.7 million to Congress. There are 294 sitting members of Congress that have accepted contributions from the NRA, and that doesn’t even include the millions of dollars from outside lobbying.

So before I get up here in my liberal bubble and I ask for gun control and universal background checks and banning assault rifles, we’ve got to be able to have the conversation, and right now, specifically Congress, has blocked legislation for the CDC to study gun-related violence. We can’t even talk about the issue with real statistics and facts. So I don’t know if this is, like, a Kickstarter thing, but if $3.7 million can buy political influence to take lives, if we raise $4 million would you guys take that to save lives? I don’t know.

Ultimately, I just gotta ask you this. Look, when I got into comedy, and when you guys got into media, and when you guys got into politics, we wanted to do the best work we could possibly do. Is this what you want your legacy to be? That you were a could-have-done-something Congress, but you didn’t because of outside lobbying? That you were complicit in the deaths of thousands of Americans?

And look, I know being a member of Congress is hard — you’ve got to placate your base, you’ve got to look out for re-election, you’ve got to answer to lobbyists. But please persevere, because our thoughts and prayers are with you. Good night.

Nancy Polosi: 'This president has appointed so many people from Goldman Sachs to high positions that there's nobody left to listen to Hillary's speeches', Gridiron Club dinner - 2017

4 March 2017, Gridiron Club, Washington DC, USA

This is a part transcript. Speakola has been unable to find a full transcript.

I know that the rituals of the Gridiron can be formal, so I want to greet them in a way they're more familiar with: Nasdrovia!

Speaking of … we were told that Jeff Sessions intended to be here tonight, but I understand he had to recuse himself. Excuse! Excuse!

[To Pence] Does the president know you're here, laughing it up with the enemies of the American people?

It's okay, Mr. Vice President, people here can keep a secret. This isn't the White House.

[Here are few more of Pelosi's best zingers]

'Urgent matter'

I am sorry the president couldn't join us. I understand that he is in the Situation Room, monitoring an urgent matter that demands his full attention: "Saturday Night Live.

'Period drama'

This White House has more drama among rich people than a Jane Austen novel. In fact, I'm told the Secret Service code names for President Trump and Bannon are "Pride" and "Prejudice."

'Drain the swamp'

This president has appointed so many people from Goldman Sachs to high positions that there's nobody left to listen to Hillary's speeches.

'Love D.C.'

But don't you love D.C. in March? The sun starts to shine, and we can finally see all the emoluments. I'm sorry, the monuments.

'Self flagulation'

Vice President Pence recently mixed up the Israeli and Nicaraguan flags.

We've all used the wrong emoji before. But moving our embassy from Tel Aviv to Managua? That's going a little too far.

Don't worry. In the words of the ancient Hebrew proverb: "No problemo. Esta bien."

'The Oscar goes to'

The president is paranoid that Hollywood is against him — and you know everything's all about him. As for the Academy Awards, he thought the nominated films were all documentaries:

Fences was about his immigration policy.

Arrival was about his travel ban.

La La Land was about his first month in office.

And Hidden Figures was about his tax returns.

This is Joe Biden's Gridiron Club speech from 2016

John F Kennedy : 'Even though we never like it', On the importance of the press to a free society - 1962

December 1962, Washington DC, USA

President Kennedy had been on the end of much press criticism for the botched Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. 

Sandor Vanocur (NBC): You once said that you were reading more and enjoying it less. Are you still as avid a newspaper reader, magazine—I remember those of us who traveled with you on the campaign, a magazine wasn't safe around you.

JFK: Oh, yes. No, no, I think it is invaluable, even though it may cause you—it is never pleasant to be reading things that are not agreeable news, but I would say that it is an invaluable arm of the presidency, as a check really on what is going on in the administration, and more things come to my attention that cause me concern or give me information. So I would think that Mr. Khrushchev operating a totalitarian system, which has many advantages as far as being able to move in secret, and all the rest—there is a terrific disadvantage not having the abrasive quality of the press applied to you daily, to an administration, even though we never like it, and even though we wish they didn't write it, and even though we disapprove, there isn't any doubt that we could not do the job at all in a free society without a very, very active press.

Robert Kennedy: 'This country needs honesty and candor in its political life', Kansas State University - 1968

18 March 1968, University of Kansas, Kansas, USA

Thank you very much.  Chancellor, Governor and Mrs. Docking, Senator and Mrs. Pierson, ladies and gentlemen and my friends, I'm very pleased to be here.  I'm really not here to make a speech I've come because I came from Kansas State and they want to send their love to all of you.  They did. That's all they talk about over there, how much they love you.  Actually, I want to establish the fact that I am not an alumnus of Villanova.
I'm very pleased and very touched, as my wife is, at your warm reception here.  I think of my colleagues in the United States Senate, I think of my friends there, and I think of the warmth that exists in the Senate of the United States - I don't know why you're laughing - I was sick last year and I received a message from the Senate of the United States which said: "We hope you recover," and the vote was forty-two to forty.

And then they took a poll in one of the financial magazines of five hundred of the largest businessmen in the United States, to ask them, what political leader they most admired, who they wanted to see as President of the United States, and I received one vote, and I understand they're looking for him.  I could take all my supporters to lunch, but I'm - I don't know whether you're going to like what I'm going to say today but I just want you to remember, as you look back upon this day, and when it comes to a question of who you're going to support - that it was a Kennedy who got you out of class.

I am very pleased to be here with my colleagues, Senator Pierson, who I think has contributed so much in the Senate of the United States - who has fought for the interests of Kansas and has had a distinguished career, and I'm very proud to be associated with him.  And Senator Carlson who is not here, who is one of the most respected members of the Senate of the United States - respected not just on the Republican side - by the Democratic side, by all of his colleagues and I'm pleased and proud to be in the Senate with Senator Carlson of the State of Kansas.

And I'm happy to be here with an old friend, Governor Docking.  I don't think there was anyone that was more committed to President Kennedy and made more of an effort under the most adverse circumstances and with the most difficult of situations than his father, who was then Governor of the State of Kansas - nobody I worked with more closely, myself, when I was in Los Angeles.  We weren't 100 percent successful, but that was a relationship that I will always value, and I know how highly President Kennedy valued it and I'm very pleased to see him - and to have seen his mother, Mrs. Docking today also, so I'm very pleased to be in his State.

And then I'm pleased to be here because I like to see all of you, in addition.

In 1824, when Thomas Hart Benton was urging in Congress the development of Iowa and other western territories, he was opposed by Daniel Webster, the Senator from Massachusetts.  "What," asked Webster, "what do we want with this vast and worthless area?  This region of savages and wild beasts.  Of deserts of shifting sands and of whirlwinds.  Of dust, and of cactus and of prairie dogs.

"To what use," he said, "could we ever hope to put these great deserts?  I will never vote for one-cent from the public treasury, to place the west one inch closer to Boston, than it is now."  And that is why, I am here today, instead of my brother Edward.

I'm glad to come here to the home of the man who publicly wrote: "If our colleges and universities do not breed men who riot, who rebel, who attack life with all the youthful vision and vigor, then there is something wrong with our colleges.  The more riots that come out of our college campuses, the better the world for tomorrow."  And despite all the accusations against me, those words were not written by me, they were written by that notorious seditionist, William Allen White.  And I know what great affection this university has for him.  He is an honored man today, here on your campus and around the rest of the nation.  But when he lived and wrote, he was reviled as an extremist and worse.  For he spoke, he spoke as he believed.  He did not conceal his concern in comforting words. He did not delude his readers or himself with false hopes and with illusions.  This spirit of honest confrontation is what America needs today.  It has been missing all too often in the recent years and it is one of the reasons that I run for President of the United States.

For we as a people, we as a people, are strong enough, we are brave enough to be told the truth of where we stand.  This country needs honesty and candor in its political life and from the President of the United States.  But I don't want to run for the presidency - I don't want America to make the critical choice of direction and leadership this year without confronting that truth.  I don't want to win support of votes by hiding the American condition in false hopes or illusions.  I want us to find out the promise of the future, what we can accomplish here in the United States, what this country does stand for and what is expected of us in the years ahead.  And I also want us to know and examine where we've gone wrong.  And I want all of us, young and old, to have a chance to build a better country and change the direction of the United States of America.

This morning I spoke about the war in Vietnam, and I will speak briefly about it in a few moments.  But there is much more to this critical election year than the war in Vietnam.

It is, at a root, the root  of all of it, the national soul of the United States.  The President calls it "restlessness."  Our cabinet officers, such as John Gardiner and others tell us that America is deep in a malaise of spirit:  discouraging initiative, paralyzing will and action, and dividing Americans from one another, by their age, their views and by the color of their skin and I don't think we have to accept that here in the United States of America.

Demonstrators shout down government officials and the government answers by drafting demonstrators.  Anarchists threaten to burn the country down and some have begun to try, while tanks have patrolled American streets and machine guns have fired at American children.  I don't think this a satisfying situation for the United States of America.

Our young people - the best educated, and the best comforted in our history, turn from the Peace Corps and public commitment of a few years ago - to lives of disengagement and despair - many of them turned on with drugs and turned off on America - none of them here, of course, at Kansas - right?

All around us, all around us, - not just on the question of Vietnam, not just on the question of the cities, not just the question of poverty, not just on the problems of race relations - but all around us, and why you are so concerned and why you are so disturbed - the fact is, that men have lost confidence in themselves, in each other, it is confidence which has sustained us so much in the past - rather than answer the cries of deprivation and despair - cries which the President's Commission on Civil Disorders tells us could split our nation finally asunder - rather than answer these desperate cries, hundreds of communities and millions of citizens are looking for their answers, to force and repression and private gun stocks - so that we confront our fellow citizen across impossible barriers of hostility and mistrust and again, I don't believe that we have to accept that.  I don't believe that it's necessary in the United States of America.  I think that we can work together - I don't think that we have to shoot at each other, to beat each other, to curse each other and criticize each other, I think that we can do better in this country.  And that is why I run for President of the United States.

And if we seem powerless to stop this growing division between Americans, who at least confront one another, there are millions more living in the hidden places, whose names and faces are completely unknown - but I have seen these other Americans - I have seen children in Mississippi starving, their bodies so crippled from hunger and their minds have been so destroyed for their whole life that they will have no future.  I have seen children in Mississippi - here in the United States - with a gross national product of $800 billion dollars - I have seen children in the Delta area of Mississippi with distended stomachs, whose faces are covered with sores from starvation, and we haven't developed a policy so we can get enough food so that they can live, so that their children, so that their lives are not destroyed, I don't think that's acceptable in the United States of America and I think we need a change.

I have seen Indians living on their bare and meager reservations, with no jobs, with an unemployment rate of 80 percent, and with so little hope for the future, so little hope for the future that for young people, for young men and women in their teens, the greatest cause of death amongst them is suicide.

That they end their lives by killing themselves - I don't think that we have to accept that - for the first American, for this minority here in the United States.  If young boys and girls are so filled with despair when they are going to high school and feel that their lives are so hopeless and that nobody's going to care for them, nobody's going to be involved with them, and nobody's going to bother with them, that they either hang themselves, shoot themselves or kill themselves - I don't think that's acceptable and I think the United States of America - I think the American people, I think we can do much, much better.  And I run for the presidency because of that, I run for the presidency because I have seen proud men in the hills of Appalachia, who wish only to work in dignity, but they cannot, for the mines are closed and their jobs are gone and no one - neither industry, nor labor, nor government - has cared enough to help.

I think we here in this country, with the unselfish spirit that exists in the United States of America, I think we can do better here also.

I have seen the people of the black ghetto, listening to ever greater promises of equality and of justice, as they sit in the same decaying schools and huddled in the same filthy rooms - without heat - warding off the cold and warding off the rats.

If we believe that we, as Americans, are bound together by a common concern for each other, then an urgent national priority is upon us.  We must begin to end the disgrace of this other America.

And this is one of the great tasks of leadership for us, as individuals and citizens this year.  But even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task, it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction - purpose and dignity - that afflicts us all.  Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things.  Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product - if we judge the United States of America by that - that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage.  It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them.  It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl.  It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities.  It counts Whitman's rifle and Speck's knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.  Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play.  It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.  It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.  And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.

If this is true here at home, so it is true elsewhere in world.  From the beginning our proudest boast has been the promise of Jefferson, that we, here in this country would be the best hope of mankind.  And now, as we look at the war in Vietnam, we wonder if we still hold a decent respect for the opinions of mankind and whether the opinion maintained a descent respect for us or whether like Athens of old, we will forfeit sympathy and support, and ultimately our very security, in the single-minded pursuit of our own goals and our own objectives.  I do not want, and I do believe that most Americans do not want, to sell out America's interest to simply withdraw - to raise the white flag of surrender in Vietnam - that would be unacceptable to us as a people, and unacceptable to us as a country.  But I am concerned about the course of action that we are presently following in South Vietnam. I am concerned, I am concerned about the fact that this has been made America's War.  It was said, a number of years ago that this is "their war" "this is the war of the South Vietnamese" that "we can help them, but we can't win it for them" but over the period of the last three years we have made the war and the struggle in South Vietnam our war, and I think that's unacceptable.

I don't accept the idea that this is just a military action, that this is just a military effort, and every time we have had difficulties in South Vietnam and Southeast Asia we have had only one response, we have had only one way to deal with it - month after month - year after year we have dealt with it in only on way and that's to send more military men and increase our military power and I don't think that's what the kind of a struggle that it is in Southeast Asia.

I think that this is a question of the people of South Vietnam, I think its a question of the people of South Vietnam feeling its worth their efforts - that they're going to make the sacrifice - that they feel that their country and their government is worth fighting for and I think the development of the last several years have shown, have demonstrated that the people of South Vietnam feel no association and no affiliation for the government of Saigon and I don't think it's up to us here in the United States, I don't think it's up to us here in the United States, to say that we're going to destroy all of South Vietnam because we have a commitment there.  The commander of the American forces at Ben Tre said we had to destroy that city in order to save it.  So 38,000 people were wiped out or made refugees.  We here in the United States - not just the United States government, not just the commanders of and forces in South Vietnam, the United States government and every human being that's in this room - we are part of that decision and I don't think that we need do that any longer and I think we should change our policy.

I don't want to be part of a government, I don't want to be part of the United States, I don't want to be part of the American people, and have them write of us as they wrote of Rome: "They made a desert and they called it peace."

I think that we should go to the negotiating table, and I think we should take the steps to go to the negotiating table.

And I've said it over the period of the last two years, I think that we have a chance to have negotiations, and the possibility of meaningful negotiations, but last February, a year ago, when the greatest opportunity existed for negotiations the Administration and the President of the United States felt that the military victory was right around the corner and we sent a message to Ho Chi Minh, in February 8th of 1967 virtually asking for their unconditional surrender, we are not going to obtain the unconditional surrender of the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong anymore than they're going to obtain the unconditional surrender of the United States of America.  We're going to have to negotiate, we're going to have to make compromises,  we're going to have to negotiate  with the National Liberation Front.  But people can argue, "That's unfortunate that we have to negotiate with the National Liberation Front," but that is a fact of life.  We have three choices: We can either pull out of South Vietnam unilaterally and raise the white flag - I think that's unacceptable.

Second, we can continue to escalate, we can continue to send more men there, until we have millions and millions of more men and we can continue to bomb North Vietnam, and in my judgment we will be no nearer success, we will be no nearer victory than we are now in February of 1968.

And the third step that we can take is to go to the negotiating table.  We can go to the negotiating table and not achieve everything that we wish.  One of the things that we're going to have to accept as American people, but the other, the other alternative is so unacceptable.  One of the things that we're going to have to accept as American people and that the United States government must accept, is that the National Liberation Front is going to play a role in the future political process of South Vietnam.

And we're going to have to negotiate with them.  That they are going to play some role in the future political process of South Vietnam, that there are going to be elections and the people of South Vietnam, are ultimately going to determine and decide their own future.

That is the course of action, that is the course of action that I would like to see.  I would like to see the United States government to make it clear to the government of Saigon that we are not going to tolerate the corruption and the dishonesty.  I think that we should make it clear to the government of Saigon that if we're going to draft young men, 18 years of age here in the United States, if we're going to draft young men who are 19 years-old here in the United States, and wer're going to send them to fight and die in Khe Sanh, that we want the government of South Vietnam to draft their 18-year-olds and their 19-year-olds.

And I want to make it clear that if the government of Saigon, feels Khe Sanh or Que Son and the area in the demilitarized zone are so important, if Khe San is so important to the government of Saigon, I want to see those American marines out of there and South Vietnamese troops in there.

I want to have an explanation as to why American boys killed, two weeks ago, in South Vietnam, were three times as many - more than three times as many, as the soldiers of South Vietnam.  I want to understand why the casualties and the deaths, over the period of the last two weeks, at the height of the fighting, should be so heavily American casualties, as compared to the South Vietnamese.  This is their war.  I think we have to make the effort to help them, I think that we have to make the effort to fight, but I don't think that we should have to carry the whole burden of that war, I think the South Vietnamese should.

And if I am elected President of the United States, with help, with your help, these are the kinds of policies that I'm going to put into operation.

We can do better here in the United States, we can do better.  We can do better in our relationships to other countries around the rest of the globe.  President Kennedy, when he campaigned in 1960, he talked about the loss of prestige that the United States had suffered around the rest of the globe, but look at what our condition is at the present time.  The President of the United States goes to a meeting of the OAS at Montevideo- can he go into the city of Montevideo? Or can he travel through the cities of Latin America where there was such deep love and deep respect?  He has to stay in a military base at Montevideo, with American ships out at sea and American helicopters overhead in order to ensure that he's protected, I don't think that that's acceptable.

I think that we should have conditions here in the United States, and support enough for our policies, so that the President of the United States can travel freely and clearly across all the cities of this country, and not just to military bases.

I think there's more that we can do internally here, I think there's more that we can do in South Vietnam.  I don't think we have to accept the situation, as we have it at the moment.  I think that we can do better, and I think the American people think that we can do better.

George Bernard Shaw once wrote, "Some people see things as they are and say why?  I dream things that never were and say, why not?"

So I come here to Kansas to ask for your help.  In the difficult five months ahead, before the convention in Chicago, I ask for your help and for your assistance.  If you believe that the United States can do better.  If you believe that we should change our course of action.  If you believe that the United States stands for something here internally as well as elsewhere around the globe, I ask for your help and your assistance and your hand over the period of the next five months.

And when we win in November, and when we win in November, and we begin a new period of time for the United States of America - I want the next generation of Americans to look back upon this period and say as they said of Plato: "Joy was in those days, but to live."  Thank you very much.

Governor Jay Inslee: ' It is religious discrimination in its barest and most obvious form', response to Muslim Ban by President Trump - 2017

29 January 2017, Sea-Tac airport, Seattle, Washington State, USA

With only two hours notice of what was happening at Seattle International airport in relation to the Trump executive order banning arrivals from 7 Muslim nations, Washington State Governor Jay Inslee delivered this searing news conference.

The manifest and unjustifiable chaos and cruelty caused by President Trump's executive order is now on full display here at Sea-Tac airport.

The illegality and unconstitutionality and the religious discrimination of his executive order is now on full display at Seattle International airport.

And the gross incompetence and ineffectiveness of this action, without notice, to local officials whose job it is to run airports, is on full display here at Sea-Tac airport.

First I'm going to address the gross cruelty of this.

These are people who have left war-torn regions, chaos, mass poverty, many of whom have relatives here who are citizens of the United States, who have crossed the abyss from disaster to hope, who are ready and landed in the home and land of the brave, who are allowed to get on airplanes to cross the oceans, to a life of hope, who are now torn apart from their relatives who are waiting at the end of the gate?

What type of inhumane attitude allows that to happen in this nation?

That is what is going on.

We have a family here today who I've just met, a citizen of the United States, the Donald Trump administration allowed her husband to get on a plane in Vienna, waiting to get in the arms of his wife, but didn’t let him go the six feet across this gate to embrace his wife.

What type of cruel action based on demogoguery and fear does that to people,  to anybody? I won't stand.

Secondly this is an grossly unconstitutional and highly probably illegal act. It is religious discrimination in its barest and most obvious form. Not only did it target just Muslim countries, it is clearly religiously discriminatory, when the President himself said,  'we're going to say, Muslims are at the bottom of the barrel, and other religions are at the top.'

We have never done this, in over two centuries of American history, and it is on display here at Sea-Tac.

We're drawing the line right here at Sea-Tac. And I hope people will do it at airports across the country.

Listen I've seen this movie.

When I got a call two hours ago, about what was going on in our airport, I thought about the history of Baybridge Island, I live on Bainbridge Island. Seventy five years ago we saw this movie again. Where because of fear, the American government  issued another executive order, in February 1942. And rounded up American citizens who were of Japanese-American ancestry - because of fear, and only fear, and sent them to camps, for years.

I know from Bainbridge Island what fear can do, and I know Americans must stand up against this today across America.

The third point I want to make, this is probably the most incompetent, ineffective, unconsciously provocatiive and dangerous action of any government I have ever seen. To drop this on Sea-Tac airport, with no notice of how to handle this, I gotta tell you, these people couldn't run a two car funeral. And it's very disappointing to see our federal government create chaos in our nation.

And I'll let you know these aren't just refugees, these are business people who now might be in the high tech sector they might be in an IT position, they can't leave the country right now in case they can't get back in. Even though they're legally here in this country.

This is damaging to the economy in my State! And it is unacceptable.

So I called the White House about an hour ago, I talked to Justin Clarke who is the # of Inter-Governmental affairs, who was the highest ranking person that I could reach, and I expressed my profound disappointment and hope that he would reinstate just a little bit of humanity and common sense in this country, and allow these people who are in transit, to cross the oceans and let them finish the last six feet when we told them they could come into this country.  I asked him to pass my thoughts along, and hope it would reach the chief of staff, that has not happened yet.

I have also talked to the Attorney General's office. The Attorney General is now examining what options we have. It is difficult though, because frankly the judiicial system is being held hostage here too!

Donald Trump: 'America will start winning again, winning like never before', Inaugural speech - 2017

21 January 2017, Washington DC, USA

Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow Americans, and people of the world: Thank you.
We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and to restore its promise for all of our people.
Together, we will determine the course of America and the world for years to come.
We will face challenges. We will confront hardships. But we will get the job done.
Every four years, we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power, and we are grateful to President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition. They have been magnificent.
Today's ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another -- but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People.
Words from the past: Inauguration speech library
For too long, a small group in our nation's Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished -- but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered -- but the jobs left, and the factories closed.
The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories; their triumphs have not been your triumphs; and while they celebrated in our nation's capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.
That all changes -- starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.
It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America. This is your day. This is your celebration. And this, the United States of America, is your country.
What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.
Everyone is listening to you now.
You came by the tens of millions to become part of a historic movement the likes of which the world has never seen before. At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction: that a nation exists to serve its citizens.
Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families, and good jobs for themselves. These are the just and reasonable demands of a righteous public.
But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists: Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities; rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation; an education system flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of knowledge; and the crime and gangs and drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.
This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.
We are one nation -- and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams; and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home, and one glorious destiny.
The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to all Americans.
For many decades, we've enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry; subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military; we've defended other nation's borders while refusing to defend our own; and spent trillions of dollars overseas while America's infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay.
We've made other countries rich while the wealth, strength, and confidence of our country has disappeared over the horizon.
One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores, with not even a thought about the millions upon millions of American workers left behind.
The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed across the entire world.
But that is the past. And now we are looking only to the future. We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power.
From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.
From this moment on, it's going to be America First.
Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs, will be made to benefit American workers and American families. We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength.
I will fight for you with every breath in my body -- and I will never, ever let you down.
America will start winning again, winning like never before.
We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams.
We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation.
We will get our people off of welfare and back to work -- rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor.
We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American.
We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world -- but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.
We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to follow.
We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones -- and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth.
At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.
When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice. The Bible tells us, "How good and pleasant it is when God's people live together in unity."
We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity.
When America is united, America is totally unstoppable.
There should be no fear -- we are protected, and we will always be protected.
We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement and, most importantly, we are protected by God.
Finally, we must think big and dream even bigger.
In America, we understand that a nation is only living as long as it is striving.
We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action -- constantly complaining but never doing anything about it.
The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.
Do not let anyone tell you it cannot be done. No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America.
We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again.
We stand at the birth of a new millennium, ready to unlock the mysteries of space, to free the Earth from the miseries of disease, and to harness the energies, industries and technologies of tomorrow.
A new national pride will stir our souls, lift our sights, and heal our divisions.
It is time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget: that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots, we all enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the same great American Flag.
And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky, they fill their heart with the same dreams, and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty Creator.
So to all Americans, in every city near and far, small and large, from mountain to mountain, and from ocean to ocean, hear these words:
You will never be ignored again.
Your voice, your hopes, and your dreams will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way.
Together, We will make America strong again.
We will make wealthy again.
We will make America proud again.
We will make America safe again.
And yes, together, we will make America great again. Thank you. God bless you. And God bless America.

Marty Walsh: 'You are safe in Boston', city of Boston response to Trump immigration policies - 2016

26 January 2017, Boston, USA

This is America who are standing behind me. Many immigrants who work for the city of Boston. And many first generation Americans who work for the city of Boston, who are proud of their heritage and where they come from.

I called this press conference today because I am disturbed and angered by the news out of Washington DC. Washington is advancing the most destructive and un-American threats made on America ca during the campaign. The latest executive orders and statements about immigrants by the president are a direct attack on Boston's people, Boston's strength and Boston's values.

We are a city and a nation built on the immigrant contributions and we depend on newcomers for the  vitality and

Twenty eight percent of the residents of the city of Boston are immigrants.

Forty eight percent of our children, like myself, have at least one foreign born parent.

Boston was here for me and my family, and for as long as I am mayor, I will never turn my  back on those who are seeking a better life.

We will continue to foster trusting relationships, between law enforcement and the immigrant community. And we will not waste valuable police resources on misguided federal actions.

We will not be intimidated by the threat to federal funding. We have each other's backs, and we have the Constitution of the United States of America on our side.

I want to say directly to anyone who feels threatened here today, or vulnerable, 'You are safe in Boston'. We will do everything lawful in our power to protect you.

If necessary, we will use City Hall itself to shelter and protect anyone who is targeted unjustly.

I want to say again, of  all Boston to Washington, we will not retreat one inch, from protecting diverse local communities that made us one of the most successful cities in the world.

Our Office of Immigrant Advancement is available and its extended services for immigrants will be proactively monitoring this situation. Anyone who might have questions, we ask you to contact 311, and we have set up online, to answer any questions that might come in.

And finally - this business of building a wall. The President's energy and the nation's resources, should be aimed at solvingserious solutions, challenges that we face both globally and locally.

He should direct his administration to create good jobs, he should direct plans to help the homeless on our streets. We have a homeless census count tonight, and it would be great to be able to tell them that they have a home. The veterans re-entering civilian life. the seniors who have worked hard all their life, and deserve a secure retirement, and the kids in our schools.

The President's job is to bring us together and elevate us. not to divide us and tear us down.

Barack & Michelle Obama: 'One voice can change a room', Election eve rally - 2012

4 November 2012, Des Moines, Iowa, USA

MRS. OBAMA:  Thank you, guys.  Thanks so much.

AUDIENCE:  We love Michelle!  We love Michelle!

MRS. OBAMA:  (Laughter.)  And I love you.  I love you from the bottom of my heart.  And I am beyond thrilled to be here with all of you. 

But we have to give some love up for Bruce Springsteen.  I mean, gosh.  (Applause.)  For months, I have heard his songs played at our rallies.  But I have to say, there's nothing like seeing The Boss in person.  (Applause.)  Nothing like it.  He has just been tremendous.  He and his family and his team, they've just been amazing.  So we want to thank Bruce for everything that he's done for us. 

And more than anything else, I want to thank you all for being here tonight.  I mean, as you know this is a pretty emotional time for us, because this is the final event of my husband's final campaign.  (Applause.)  So this is the last time that he and I will be onstage together at a campaign rally.  And that's why we wanted to come here to Iowa tonight -- (applause)  -- because truly this is where it all began, right here.

And I have so many fond memories of this state -- the house parties in Sioux City and Cedar Rapids; celebrating Malia's birthday in Pella; and seeing my husband's face carved in butter. (Applause.)  Believe me, we still talk about that at Christmas.  (Laughter.) 

But I will never forget the kindness and warmth and love that you all showed me and my family, especially our girls.  That is truly what made the difference back in those early days when I wasn't so sure about this whole process; back when I was still wondering what it would mean for our girls and our family if Barack got the chance to serve as President. 

But the truth is while I had my worries and my fears, I also realized that this decision affected not only me as a wife and a mother, but as a voter, as an American.  And I started envisioning the kind of person that I wanted to lead our country. And I knew that I wanted a President with a steady character, with deep compassion and strong convictions.  I wanted a President who was smart.  (Applause.)  I wanted someone we could trust -- (applause) -- someone who would always, always tell us the truth even when it's hard.  (Applause.)  And I wanted a President driven not by politics or which way the wind is blowing, but by the struggles, hopes and dreams of all Americans. (Applause.)

And the more I thought about it, the more I knew in my heart that I was describing Barack.  I knew he could be that President. And for four years, that's exactly what he's done.  He has stayed true to himself, and with your help, he's worked day after day to make this country better, to move it forward.  He's rescued our economy from the brink of collapse and saved the auto industry.  (Applause.)  He's passed historic health reform -- (applause) -- ended the war in Iraq.  (Applause.)  He's fought so women get equal pay and students can afford college.  (Applause.)  He's fought for our seniors, so that they can retire with dignit;, and our veterans, so that they can give the benefits they earned and the respect they deserve.  (Applause.)  

For four years, Barack has been fighting to give every single one of us a fair shot at that great American Dream, no matter what we look like or where we come from or who we love.  (Applause.)  And for four years, we have all seen what I've seen for the past 23 years.  We've seen a man of honor and integrity who knows what he believes and stays true to his values.  (Applause.)  I'm so proud of my husband.  We have seen an honest man who knows the facts and always gives it to us straight.  We've seen a man whose strength and resolve to build a better tomorrow has never wavered, never. 

And that's why I am so thrilled to be here in Iowa tonight-- (applause) -- because long before most people even knew his name, you all saw what I saw.  So you did all this crazy stuff.  You showed up at campaign offices here in Des Moines and offices all over the state.  More importantly, you opened your homes.  You held caucus trainings.  You marched with us at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner.  (Applause.)  And then, on a cold January night, you stood up for Barack, because you knew that he would stand up for you.  (Applause.) 

And over these past four years, our family has been truly blessed -- truly blessed -- by all of the love and support and prayers that we have received from every corner of this country. And Barack has been truly blessed to have all of you by his side as we have worked together to bring that change we can believe in.

It is an honor and a privilege to serve this nation -- just know that.  And tomorrow, we get the chance to finish what we started here in Iowa.  (Applause.)  Tomorrow, all across this state, all across this country, we will line up and vote in libraries and community centers, in school gyms.  We're going to knock on doors until our fingers are numb.  We're going to make calls until our voices are hoarse.  (Applause.)  And we won't stop until every voice and every last vote is counted.  (Applause.) 

And we will do it.  We will do it, because while we have come so far, we know that there is so much more to do.  And what we really, truly know is that we cannot turn back now.  We need to keep moving this country forward.  (Applause.) 

So that means that we need to reelect the man who has been fighting for us every single day -- my husband, the love of my life -- the President of the United States Barack Obama.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Hello, Iowa!  (Applause.)  Tomorrow.  Tomorrow, Iowa.  Tomorrow, from the granite of New Hampshire to the Rockies of Colorado, from the coastlines of Florida to Virginia’s rolling hills, from the valleys of Ohio to these Iowa fields -- we will keep America moving forward.  (Applause.) 

I’ve come back to Iowa one more time to ask for your vote.  (Applause.)  I came back to ask you to help us finish what we’ve started.  (Applause.) Because this is where our movement for change began.  (Applause.)  Right here.  Right here. 

Right behind these bleachers is the building that was home to our Iowa headquarters in 2008.  (Applause.)  I was just inside, and it brought back a whole lot of memories.  This was where some of the first young people who joined our campaign set up shop, willing to work for little pay and less sleep because they believed that people who love their country can change it. 

This was where so many of you who shared that belief came to help.  When the heat didn’t work for the first week or so -- (laughter) -- some of you brought hats and gloves for the staff. These poor kids, they weren’t prepared.  (Laughter.)  When the walls inside were bare, one of you painted a mural to lift everybody’s spirits.  When we had a Steak Fry to march to, when we had a J-J Dinner to fire up -- (applause) -- you brought your neighbors and you made homemade signs.  When we had calls to make, teachers and nurses showed up after work, already bone-tired, but staying anyway, late into the night.

And you welcomed me and Michelle into your homes.  And you picked us up when we needed a lift.  And your faces gave me new hope for this country’s future, and your stories filled me with resolve to fight for you every single day I set foot in the Oval Office.  (Applause.)

You inspired us.  And I want to take this opportunity to say one thing to all the young people and not-so-young people who’ve given so much to this campaign over the years -- those of you who haven’t done this just for me, but for each other -- for a laid-off family member, for a sick child, for a fallen friend -- to all of you who’ve lived and breathed the hard work of change:  I want to thank you. 

You took this campaign and you made it your own.  And you organized yourselves, block by block, neighborhood by neighborhood, county by county, starting a movement that spread across the country -- (applause) -- a movement made up of young and old, and rich and poor, and black and white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, Democrats, Republicans, who believe we’ve all got something to contribute; that we all deserve a shot at our own American Dream.  (Applause.)

And when the cynics said we couldn’t, you said “Yes, we can.”

AUDIENCE:  Yes, we can!  (Applause.) 

THE PRESIDENT:  You said, “Yes, we can” -- and we did.  Against all odds, we did.  We didn’t know what challenges would come when we began this journey.  We didn’t know how deep the crisis would turn out.  But we knew we would get through those challenges the same way this nation always has -- with that determined, unconquerable American spirit that says no matter how bad the storm gets, no matter how tough times are, we’re all in this together.  We rise or fall as one nation and as one people. (Applause.)

That’s the spirit that’s carried us through the trials and tribulations of the last four years.  In 2008, we were in the middle of two wars and the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.  And today, our businesses have created nearly five and a half million new jobs.  (Applause.)  The American auto industry is back.  Home values are on the rise.  We’re less dependent on foreign oil than any time in the last 20 years.  We’ve doubled the production of clean energy.  Because of the service and sacrifice of our brave men and women in uniform, the war in Iraq is over.  The war in Afghanistan is ending.  Al Qaeda is on the run.  Osama bin Laden is dead.  (Applause.)

We’ve made real progress these past four years.  But, Iowa, we’re here tonight because we’ve got more work to do.  We’re not done yet on this journey.  We’ve got more road to travel.  As long as there’s a single American who wants a job but can’t find one; as long as there are families working harder but still falling behind; as long as there’s a child anywhere in Des Moines, anywhere in Iowa, anywhere in this country languishing in poverty, barred from opportunity -- our work isn’t done.  (Applause.)  Our fight for change goes on. 

Because we know this nation cannot succeed without a growing, thriving middle class and sturdy ladders for everybody who is willing to work to get into that middle class.  (Applause.)  Our fight goes on because America has always done best when everybody has got a fair shot, and everybody is doing their fair share, and everybody plays by the same rules.  The people of Iowa understand that.  That’s what we believe.  That’s why you elected me in 2008.  And, Iowa, that’s why I’m running for a second term as President of the United States.  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Four more years!  Four more years!  Four more years!

THE PRESIDENT:  Now, the choice you make tomorrow -- and you understand this; Iowans, you guys pay attention -- (laughter and applause) -- the choice you make is not just between two candidates or parties.  It’s a choice between two different visions of America -- who we are; what we believe; what we care about.  It’s a choice between going back to the top-down policies that caused the mess we’ve been fighting our way out of for four years -- or moving forward to a future that’s built on a strong and growing middle class.

And, Iowa, you know me as well as anybody.  You’ve seen a lot of me these last six years.  (Laughter.)  And you know what, you may not agree with every decision I’ve made -- Michelle doesn’t.  (Laughter.)  There may be times where you’ve been frustrated at the pace of change.  I promise you, so have I.  But I tell you what, you know what I believe.  You know where I stand.  You know I tell the truth.  (Applause.)  You know I’ll fight for you and your families every single day, as hard as I know how.  (Applause.) 

And that’s why, when we talk about change, we know what real change looks like because we’ve fought for it.  We've got the scars to prove it.  I've got the gray hair to show it.  (Laughter.)  I wasn’t this gray when I first showed up in Iowa.  (Applause.)  And sometimes it’s been hard.  Sometimes it’s been frustrating.  We understand that.  But what we also know is that when we decide to make a difference, when Americans come together, determined to bring about change, nobody can stop us.  We cannot be stopped. 

And after all we've been through together, after all that we fought through together, we cannot give up on change now.  (Applause.) 

We know what real change looks like.  Change is a country where every American has a shot at a great education -- where we recruit new teachers, train new workers, bring down tuition, so that no one in this country is forced to give up the dream of a college education.  (Applause.)  

Change comes when we live up to this country’s legacy of innovation by investing in the next generation of technology and manufacturing.  Instead of subsidizing oil company profits, I want to support energy jobs of tomorrow.  And Iowa knows about clean energy and biodiesel and wind turbines that will free this country from the grip of foreign oil.  (Applause.)

I don’t want a tax code that rewards companies for creating jobs overseas; I want to reward companies that create jobs right here in America.  That’s what change is, Iowa.  (Applause.)
  
Change is turning the page on a decade of war so we can do some nation-building here at home -- repairing our roads and our bridges, making our schools state of the art; putting our veterans back to work -- because nobody who fights for this country’s freedom should have to fight for a job, or a roof over their heads when they come home.  (Applause.)  That's what we're fighting for.  That's why we're not done.  (Applause.)  

Change is a future where we reduce our deficit by asking the wealthiest Americans to go back to the tax rates they paid when Bill Clinton was in office.  (Applause.)  We’ll cut out spending we don't need.  But as long as I’m President, we're not going to turn Medicare into a voucher just to pay for another millionaire’s tax cut.  (Applause.)  We're not going to kick a kid off of Head Start just to pay for a millionaire’s tax cut.  (Applause.)  

Because our budget reflects our priorities and our values.  And we know what our future requires.  We know what real change is.  You helped teach me that, here in Iowa.  (Applause.)  And what we also know is that change isn't easy.  Remember, a lot of you showed up to town hall meetings back in 2007, 2008, and I used to talk about change.  But I also said I'm not just talking about changing presidents.  I'm not just talking about changing parties.  I'm talking about changing our politics.  (Applause.)  
I told you I ran because your voices had been shut out of our democracy for way too long by special interests and politicians who will do whatever it takes to keep things just the way they are.  And we've seen over the last four years, the status quo in Washington, they are powerful and they have fought us every step of the way. 

When we tried -- and succeeded in reforming our health care system, they spent millions trying to stop us.  When we tried -- and succeeded -- in reforming Wall Street, they spent millions to push us back.  And we kept on going.  But those were tough fights. 

And what the protectors of the status quo in Washington are counting on now is that you’ll get worn down by all the squabbling.  You’ll get fed up with the dysfunction.  You’ll give up on the change we’ve fought for.  You’ll walk away and leave them to make decisions that affect every American.  In other words, their bet is on cynicism.  But, Iowa, you taught me to bet on you.  (Applause.)  You taught me to bet on hope.  (Applause.)  
I’ll work with anybody, of any party, to move this country forward.  And if you want to break the gridlock in Congress, you’ll vote for leaders who feel the same way -- whether they’re Democrats, or Republicans, or independents -- the kind of Iowa leaders you’ve always had -- Tom and Christie Vilsack, and Tom Harkin, and Leonard Boswell and Bruce Braley, and my great friends, Tom Miller and Mike Fitzgerald.  (Applause.)  

But there’s some principles you got to fight for.  There are times where you’ve got to take a stand.  If the price of peace in Washington is cutting deals to kick students off of financial aid, or get rid of funding for Planned Parenthood, or let insurance companies discriminate against kids with preexisting conditions, or eliminate health care for millions on Medicaid who are poor, or elderly, or disabled -- I won't pay that price.  That's not a deal I will make.  (Applause.)  That’s not bipartisanship.  That’s not change.  That’s surrender to the same forces of the status quo that has squeezed middle-class families for way too long.

And, Iowa, I’m not ready to give up on the fight.  (Applause.)  I've got a lot more fight left in me.  (Applause.)  But to wage that fight on behalf of American families, I need you to still have some fight in you, too.  (Applause.)  

The folks at the top in this country, it turns out they don’t need another champion in Washington.  They’ll always have a seat at the table.  They’ll always have access and influence.  The people who need a champion are the Americans whose letters I read late at night after a long day in the office; the men and women I meet on the campaign trail every day. 

The laid-off furniture worker who’s retraining at the age of 55 for a new career at a community college -- she needs a champion.  The restaurant owner who needs a loan to expand -- he’s got great food but the bank turned him down -- he needs help.  He needs a champion.  The cooks and the waiters and cleaning staff, working overtime in a hotel in Des Moines or Vegas, trying to save enough to buy a first home or send their kid to college -- they need a champion.  (Applause.)  

The autoworker who was laid off, thought the plant would never reopen, and is now back on the job, filled with pride and dignity, building a great car, building America -- he needs a champion.  (Applause.)   The teacher in an overcrowded classroom with outdated schoolbooks, digging into her own pocket to buy school supplies, not always feeling like she’s got the support she needs, but showing up every day because she knows that this might be the day that she’s got a breakthrough and she makes a difference in one child’s life -- she needs a champion.  (Applause.)

All those kids in inner cities, small farm towns -- kids dreaming of becoming scientists or doctors, engineers or entrepreneurs, diplomats or even a President -- they need a champion in Washington, because the future will never have as many lobbyists as the status quo -- children don't have lobbyists the way oil companies or banks do.  But it’s the dreams of those children that will be our saving grace. 

That’s what we fight for.  That’s why I need you, Iowa.  To make sure their voices are heard.  To make sure your voices are heard.  (Applause.)  And that's why we’ve come too far to turn back now.  We’ve come too far to let our hearts grow faint.  Now is the time to keep pushing forward -- (applause) -- to educate all our kids, and train all our workers, and to create new jobs, and rebuild our roads, and bring back our troops, and care for our veterans, and broaden opportunity, and grow our middle class, and restore our democracy -- and make sure that no matter who you are, or where you come from, or how you started out, what you look like, who you love, what your last name is, here in America, you can make it if you try.  That's what we're fighting for.  (Applause.)

And, Iowa, after all the months of campaigning, after all the rallies, after the millions of dollars of ads, it all comes down to you.  It’s out of my hands now.  It’s in yours.  All of it depends on what you do when you step into that voting booth tomorrow.  It’s just a remarkable thing, the way our democracy works.  And at a certain point, all this effort and all these campaign rallies -- and then it just comes down to each of us, as citizens.  All of it depends on you bringing your friend, or your neighbor, your coworker, your mom, your dad, your wife, your husband to the polls. 

That's how our democracy is supposed to be.  The single most powerful force in our democracy is you.  Moving this country forward begins with you.  (Applause.)  Don’t ever let anybody tell you your voice doesn’t matter.  Don't let anybody tell you your voice can't make a difference.  It makes a difference. 

I got a powerful reminder of this myself on our last campaign.  Folks in Iowa, I know you may have heard this story but it was early in the primaries, and we were still way down in the polls.  I think this office had just finally gotten the heat turned on.  (Laughter.)  And at the time, I was still competing in South Carolina -- it was one of the early primary states.  And I really wanted the endorsement of a state representative down there.  I met her at some function where nobody knew me, nobody could pronounce my name.  They’re wondering, what’s he thinking? (Laughter.) 

So I asked her for her endorsement.  And she said, “I tell you what, Obama -- I will give you my endorsement if you come to my hometown of Greenwood, South Carolina.”  And I think I had a little bit of wine during dinner, because right away I said “okay.”  (Laughter.)

So it’s about a month later, and I'm traveling back to South Carolina.  And we flew in late -- I think we were coming from Iowa.  We had been campaigning non-stop, traveling all through towns and having town hall meetings and shaking hands.  And in between, I'm making phone calls, asking people for support.  And so we land in Greenwood, South Carolina, at around midnight.  We get to the hotel about 1 o’clock in the morning.  I am wiped out. I'm exhausted.  And I'm dragging my bags to my room.  Back then we didn’t fly on Air Force One.  (Laughter.)  And the accommodations were a little different.  (Laughter.)

And just as I'm about to walk into the room, one of my staf taps me on the shoulder to say, “Excuse me, Senator” --I was a senator back then.  “We're going to have to wake up and be on the road at 6:30 a.m. in the morning.”  And I said, “What?” (Laughter.)  “Why?”  “Well, you made this promise to go to Greenwood, and it’s several hours away.”  (Laughter.) 

And you know, Iowa, I try to keep my promises.  So a few hours later, I wake up -- and I'm feeling terrible.  I think a cold is coming on.  And I open up the curtains to try to get some light to wake me up, but it’s pouring down rain.  Terrible storm. And I take a shower and get some coffee, and I open up the newspaper and there’s a bad story about me in The New York Times. (Laughter.)  I was much more sensitive at that time to bad stories.  (Laughter.)  I've become more accustomed to these now.

And finally I get dressed, I go downstairs and I'm walking out to the car, and my umbrella blows open -- and I'm soaked.  So by the time I'm in the car I'm wet and I'm mad and I'm still kind of sleepy.  And it turns out that Greenwood is several hours away from everyplace else.  (Laughter.) 

And so we drive, and we drive, and we drive, and we drive.  And finally we get to Greenwood -- although you don't know you're in Greenwood right away because there are not a lot of tall buildings around.  And we pull up to a small field house, and I walked in, and I'm looking around.  I don't hear a lot going on. And the state representative said she was going to organize a little meeting for us, and we walked in and there are about 20 people there.  And they’re all kind of wet, too, and they don't look very excited to see me.  (Laughter.) 

But I'm running for President, so I do what I'm supposed to do -- and I'm shaking hands, I say, “How do you do?  Nice to meet you.”  And I'm making my way around the room, and suddenly I hear this voice cry out behind me:  “Fired up.”

AUDIENCE:  Ready to go!

THE PRESIDENT:  And I'm startled, and I don't know what’s going on.  But everybody in the room -- this is a small room -- they act like this is normal.  (Laughter.)  And when the voice says, “Fired up,” they all say, “Ready to go.”

And so once again, I hear the voice:  “Fired up.”  They say, “Fired up.”  They say, “Ready to go!”  “Ready to go!”

I look around, I turned behind me -- there’s this small woman.  She’s about 60 years old; looks like she just came from church -- she got a big church hat.  (Laughter.)  And she’s looking at me, kind of peering at me, and she’s grinning, smiling, looking happy.  Turns out she’s a city councilwoman from Greenwood -- who also moonlights as a private detective.  I'm not making this up.  (Laughter.)  This is true.  And it turns out she’s famous throughout the area.  When she goes to football games and when she goes to rallies and she goes to community events, she does this chant of hers.  She does it wherever she goes.  So for the next few minutes, she just keeps on saying “Fired up.”

AUDIENCE:  Ready to go!

THE PRESIDENT:  And everybody says “Fired up,” and she says she’s “Ready to go,” and everybody else says “Ready to go.”

And I’m thinking, this woman is showing me up.  (Laughter.) This is my meeting.  I’m running for President.  (Laughter.)  And she’s dominating the room.  And I look at my staff, and they just shrug their shoulders.  They don’t know what to do. 

So this goes on for a few minutes.  Now, here’s the thing, Iowa.  After a few minutes, I’m feeling kind of fired up.  (Laughter.)  I’m feeling like I’m ready to go.  (Laughter.)  So I start joining in the chant, and my staff starts joining in the chant.  And somehow I feel pretty good. 

And we go on to talk about the lives of the people in the room, and their families and their struggles and their hopes for their kids and their grandkids.  And we drive out and it’s still raining, but it doesn’t seem so bad.  And we go to our next stop, and for the rest of the day, even after we left Greenwood, even though we still weren’t getting any big crowds anyplace, even though people still couldn’t pronounce my name, I felt good.  (Laughter.)   

And I’d see my staff, and I’d say, “Are you fired up?”  They’d say, “We’re fired up.”  I’d say, “Are you ready to go?”  And they’d say, “We’re ready to go.”  (Applause.)

And we brought that to Iowa.  And during our rallies, this became a chant, and we’d have signs saying “Fired up, Ready to go.”  And the woman, her name was Edith Childs -- she became a celebrity, and she was written up in The Wall Street Journal -- (laughter) -- and folks did news stories on her.  And this became one of the anthems of our campaign back in 2008. 

Now, here’s the end of the story, though.  We knew we were coming back to Des Moines for the last campaign rally I’ll ever do for me.  And so we were getting kind of sentimental.  And we called up Edith Childs.  And we said, why don’t you come on up?  (Applause.)  No, no, listen to this.  We said, why don’t you come on up; we’ll fly you up from South Carolina and you can do this chant one more time, just for old good-time sake.  It’s like getting the band back together again.  (Laughter.) 

And you know what Edith said?  She said, I’d love to see you, but I think we can still win North Carolina, so I’m taking a crew into North Carolina to knock on doors on Election Day -- I don’t have time just to be talking about it.  (Applause.)  I’ve got to knock on some doors.  (Applause.)  I’ve got to turn out the vote.  (Applause.)  I’m still fired up, but I’ve got work to do.  (Applause.) 

And that shows you what one voice can do.  One voice can change a room.  And if it can change a room, it can change a city.  And if it can change a city, it can change a state.  And if it can change a state, it can change a nation.  (Applause.)  And if it can change a nation, it can change the world.  (Applause.) 

And, Iowa, in 2008, your voice changed the world.  And Edith Childs asked me to ask you that if you’re willing to still stand with me tomorrow, if you’re willing to get your friends and your neighbors and your coworkers to the polls tomorrow, if you’re willing to make sure we finish what we started, she’s pretty sure we’ll win Iowa.  (Applause.)  She’s pretty sure we’ll win this election.  (Applause.)  And she just had one question for you, and that is:  Are you fired up? 

AUDIENCE:  Ready to go! 

THE PRESIDENT:  Are you fired up?

AUDIENCE:  Ready to go!

THE PRESIDENT:  Are you fired up?

AUDIENCE:  Ready to go!

THE PRESIDENT:  Are you fired up?

AUDIENCE:  Ready to go!

THE PRESIDENT:  Iowa, tomorrow let’s remind the world just why it is the United States of America is the greatest nation on Earth.  (Applause.)

I love you.  (Applause.)  Let’s go vote.  Let’s keep moving forward.  God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

4 November 2012, Des Moines, Iowa, USA

Gordon Smith: 'We have to learn the lessons of history', remarks on war in Iraq - 2006

Smith was a Republican Senator for Oregan who voted in favour of the war in Iraq in 2003

Mr. President, I know it is probably appropriate to speak of our colleagues, and I will do that on the record. I rise tonight, however, to speak about a subject heavy on my mind. It is the subject of the war in Iraq.

I have never worn the uniform of my country. I am not a soldier or a veteran. It is one of the regrets of my life. But I am a student of history, particularly military history, and it is that perspective which I brought to the Senate 10 years ago as a newly elected Member of this Chamber.

When we came to the vote on Iraq, it was an issue of great moment for me. No issue is more difficult to vote on than war and peace, because it involves the lives of our soldiers, our young men and women. It involves the expenditure of our treasure, putting on the line the prestige of our country. It is not a vote taken lightly. I have tried to be a good soldier in this Chamber. I have tried to support our President, believing at the time of the vote on the war in Iraq that we had been given good intelligence and knowing that Saddam Hussein was a menace to the world, a brutal dictator, a tyrant by any standard, and one who threatened our country in many different ways, through the financing and fomenting of terrorism. For those reasons and believing that we would find weapons of mass destruction, I voted aye.

I have been rather silent on this question ever since. I have been rather quiet because, when I was visiting Oregon troops in Kirkuk in the Kurdish area, the soldiers said to me: Senator, don't tell me you support the troops and not our mission. That gave me pause. But since that time, there have been 2,899 American casualties. There have been over 22,000 American men and women wounded. There has been an expenditure of $290 billion a figure that approaches the expenditure we have every year on an issue as important as Medicare. We have paid a price in blood and treasure that is beyond calculation by my estimation.

Now, as I witness the slow undoing of our efforts there, I rise to speak from my heart. I was greatly disturbed recently to read a comment by a man I admire in history, one Winston Churchill, who after the British mandate extended to the peoples of Iraq for 5 years, wrote to David Lloyd George, Prime Minister of England:

At present we are paying 8 millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano.

When I read that, I thought, not much has changed. We have to learn the lessons of history and sometimes they are painful because we have made mistakes.

Even though I have not worn the uniform of my country, I, with other colleagues here, love this Nation. I came into politics because I believed in some things. I am unusually proud of the fact of our recent history, the history of our Nation since my own birth. At the end of the Second World War, there were 15 nations on earth that could be counted as democracies that you and I would recognize. Today there are 150 nations on earth that are democratic and free. That would not have happened had the United States been insular and returned to our isolationist roots, had we laid down the mantle of world leadership, had we not seen the importance of propounding and encouraging the spread of democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and the values of our Bill of Rights. It is a better world because of the United States of America, and the price we have paid is one of blood and treasure.

Now we come to a great crossroads. A commission has just done some, I suppose, good work. I am still evaluating it. I welcome any ideas now because where we are leaves me feeling much like Churchill, that we are paying the price to sit on a mountain that is little more than a volcano of ingratitude.

Yet as I feel that, I remember the pride I felt when the statue of Saddam Hussein came down. I remember the thrill I felt when three times Iraqis risked their own lives to vote democratically in a way that was internationally verifiable as well as legitimate and important. Now all of those memories seem much like ashes to me.

The Iraq Study Group has given us some ideas. I don't know if they are good or not. It does seem to me that it is a recipe for retreat. It is not cut and run, but it is cut and walk. I don't know that that is any more honorable than cutting and running, because cutting and walking involves greater expenditure of our treasure, greater loss of American lives.

Many things have been attributed to George Bush. I have heard him on this floor blamed for every ill, even the weather. But I do not believe him to be a liar. I do not believe him to be a traitor, nor do I believe all the bravado and the statements and the accusations made against him. I believe him to be a very idealistic man. I believe him to have a stubborn backbone. He is not guilty of perfidy, but I do believe he is guilty of believing bad intelligence and giving us the same.

I can't tell you how devastated I was to learn that in fact we were not going to find weapons of mass destruction. But remembering the words of the soldier—don't tell me you support the troops but you don't support my mission—I felt the duty to continue my support. Yet I believe the President is guilty of trying to win a short war and not understanding fully the nature of the ancient hatreds of the Middle East. Iraq is a European creation. At the Treaty of Versailles, the victorious powers put together Kurdish, Sunni, and Shia tribes that had been killing each other for time immemorial. I would like to think there is an Iraqi identity. I would like to remember the purple fingers raised high. But we cannot want democracy for Iraq more than they want it for themselves. And what I find now is that our tactics there have failed.

Again, I am not a soldier, but I do know something about military history. And what that tells me is when you are engaged in a war of insurgency, you can't clear and leave. With few exceptions, throughout Iraq that is what we have done. To fight an insurgency often takes a decade or more. It takes more troops than we have committed. It takes clearing, holding, and building so that the people there see the value of what we are doing. They become the source of intelligence, and they weed out the insurgents. But we have not cleared and held and built. We have cleared and left, and the insurgents have come back.

I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day. That is absurd. It may even be criminal. I cannot support that anymore. I believe we need to figure out how to fight the war on terror and to do it right. So either we clear and hold and build, or let's go home.

There are no good options, as the Iraq Study Group has mentioned in their report. I am not sure cutting and walking is any better. I have little confidence that the Syrians and the Iranians are going to be serious about helping us to build a stable and democratic Iraq. I am at a crossroads as well. I want my constituents to know what is in my heart, what has guided my votes.

What will continue to guide the way I vote is simply this: I do not believe we can retreat from the greater war on terror. Iraq is a battlefield in that larger war. But I do believe we need a presence there on the near horizon at least that allows us to provide intelligence, interdiction, logistics, but mostly a presence to say to the murderers that come across the border: We are here, and we will deal with you. But we have no business being a policeman in someone else's civil war.

I welcome the Iraq Study Group's report, but if we are ultimately going to retreat, I would rather do it sooner than later. I am looking for answers, but the current course is unacceptable to this Senator. I suppose if the President is guilty of one other thing, I find it also in the words of Winston Churchill. He said:

After the First World War, let us learn our lessons. Never, never believe that any war will be smooth and easy or that anyone who embarks on this strange voyage can measure the tides and the hurricanes. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.

That is a lesson we are learning again. I am afraid, rather than leveling with the American people and saying this was going to be a decade-long conflict because of the angst and hatred that exists in that part of the world, that we tried to win it with too few troops in too fast a time. Lest anyone thinks I believe we have failed militarily, please understand I believe when President Bush stood in front of "Mission Accomplished" on an aircraft carrier that, in purely military terms, the mission was accomplished in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But winning a battle, winning a war, is different than winning a peace.

We were not prepared to win the peace by clearing, holding, and building. You don't do that fast and you don't do it with too few troops. I believe now that we must either determine to do that, or we must redeploy in a way that allows us to continue to prosecute the larger war on terror. It will not be pretty. We will pay a price in world opinion. But I, for one, am tired of paying the price of 10 or more of our troops dying a day. So let's cut and run, or cut and walk, or let us fight the war on terror more intelligently than we have, because we have fought this war in a very lamentable way.

Those are my feelings. I regret them. I would have never voted for this conflict had I reason to believe that the intelligence we had was not accurate. It was not accurate, but that is history. Now we must find a way to make the best of a terrible situation, at a minimum loss of life for our brave fighting men and women. So I will be looking for every opportunity to clear, build, hold, and win or how to bring our troops home.

I yield the floor.

Keith Oibermann: 'Mr President, the war isn't about you, or golf'. Special Comment MSNBC - 2008

14 May 2008, MSNBC studio, USA

President Bush has resorted anew to the sleaziest fear-mongering and mass manipulation of an administration and public life dedicated to realizing the lowest of our expectations. And he has now applied these poisons to the 2008 presidential election, on behalf of the party at whose center he and John McCain lurk.

Mr. Bush has predicted that the election of a Democratic president could "eventually lead to another attack on the United States." This ludicrous, infuriating, holier-than-thou and most importantly bone-headedly wrong statement came during a May 13 interview with Politico.com and online users of Yahoo.

The question was phrased as follows: "If we were to pull out of Iraq next year, what's the worst that could happen, what's the doomsday scenario?"

The president replied: "Doomsday scenario of course is that extremists throughout the Middle East would be emboldened, which would eventually lead to another attack on the United States. The biggest issue we face is, it's bigger than Iraq, it's this ideological struggle against cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives."

Mr. Bush, at long last, has it not dawned on you that the America you have now created, includes "cold-blooded killers who will kill people to achieve their political objectives?" They are those in — or formerly in — your employ, who may yet be charged some day with war crimes.

Through your haze of self-congratulation and self-pity, do you still have no earthly clue that this nation has laid waste to Iraq to achieve your political objectives? "This ideological struggle," Mr. Bush, is taking place within this country.

It is a struggle between Americans who cherish freedom, ours and everybody else's, and Americans like you, sir, to whom freedom is just a brand name, just like "Patriot Act" is a brand name or "Protect America" is a brand name.

But wait, there's more: You also said "Iraq is the place where al-Qaida and other extremists have made their stand and they will be defeated." They made no "stand" in Iraq, sir, you allowed them to assemble there!

As certainly as if that were the plan, the borders were left wide open by your government's farcical post-invasion strategy of "they'll greet us as liberators." And as certainly as if that were the plan, the inspiration for another generation of terrorists in another country was provided by your government's farcical post-invasion strategy of letting the societal infra-structure of Iraq dissolve, to be replaced by an American viceroy, enforced by merciless mercenaries who shoot unarmed Iraqis and then evade prosecution in any country by hiding behind your skirts, sir.

Terrorism inside Iraq is your creation, Mr. Bush!

It was a Yahoo user who brought up the second topic upon whose introduction Mr. Bush should have passed, or punted, or gotten up and left the room claiming he heard Dick Cheney calling him.

"Do you feel," asked an ordinary American, "that you were misled on Iraq?"

"I feel like — I felt like, there were weapons of mass destruction," the president said. "You know, 'mislead' is a strong word, it almost connotes some kind of intentional — I don't think so, I think there was a — not only our intelligence community, but intelligence communities all across the world shared the same assessment. And so I was disappointed to see how flawed our intelligence was."

Flawed.

You, Mr. Bush, and your tragically know-it-all minions, threw out every piece of intelligence that suggested there were no such weapons.

You, Mr. Bush, threw out every person who suggested that the sober, contradictory, reality-based intelligence needed to be listened to, and fast.

You, Mr. Bush, are responsible for how "intelligence communities all across the world shared the same assessment."

You and the sycophants you dredged up and put behind the most important steering wheel in the world propagated palpable nonsense and shoved it down the throat of every intelligence community across the world and punished anybody who didn't agree it was really chicken salad.

And you, Mr. Bush, threw under the bus, all of the subsequent critics who bravely stepped forward later to point out just how much of a self-fulfilling prophecy you had embraced, and adopted as this country's policy in lieu of, say, common sense.

The fiasco of pre-war intelligence, sir, is your fiasco.

You should build a great statue of yourself turning a deaf ear to the warnings of realists, while you are shown embracing the three-card monte dealers like Richard Perle and Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.

That would be a far more fitting tribute to your legacy, Mr. Bush, than this presidential library you are constructing as a giant fable about your presidency, an edifice you might as well claim was built from "Iraqi weapons of mass destruction" because there will be just as many of those inside your presidential library as there were inside Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Of course if there is one overriding theme to this president's administration it is the utter, always-failing, inability to know when to quit when it is behind. And so Mr. Bush answered yet another question about this layered, nuanced, wheels-within-wheels garbage heap that constituted his excuse for war.

"And so you feel that you didn't have all the information you should have or the right spin on that information?"

"No, no," replied the President. "I was told by people, that they had weapons of mass destruction …"

People? What people? The insane informant "Curveball?" The Iraqi snake-oil salesman Ahmed Chalabi? The American snake-oil salesman Dick Cheney?

"I was told by people that they had weapons of mass destruction, as were members of Congress, who voted for the resolution to get rid of Saddam Hussein.

"And of course, the political heat gets on and they start to run and try to hide from their votes."

Mr. Bush, you destroyed the evidence that contradicted the resolution you jammed down the Congress's throat, the way you jammed it down the nation's throat. When required by law to verify that your evidence was accurate, you simply resubmitted it, with phrases amounting to "See, I done proved it" virtually written in the margins in crayon.

You defied patriotic Americans to say "The Emperor Has No Clothes," only with the stakes — as you and the mental dwarves in your employ put it — being a "mushroom cloud over an American city."

And as a final crash of self-indulgent nonsense, when the incontrovertible truth of your panoramic and murderous deceit has even begun to cost your political party seemingly perpetual congressional seats in places like North Carolina and Mississippi, you can actually say with a straight face, sir, that for members of Congress "the political heat gets on and they start to run and try to hide from their votes" — while you greet the political heat and try to run and hide from your presidency, and your legacy — 4,000 of the Americans you were supposed to protect — dead in Iraq, with your only feeble, pathetic answer being, "I was told by people that they had weapons of mass destruction."

Then came Mr. Bush's final blow to our nation's solar plexus, his last reopening of our common wounds, his last remark that makes the rest of us question not merely his leadership or his judgment but his very suitably to remain in office.

"Mr. President," he was asked, "you haven't been golfing in recent years. Is that related to Iraq?"

"Yes," began perhaps the most startling reply of this nightmarish blight on our lives as Americans on our history. "It really is. I don't want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the Commander in Chief playing golf. I feel I owe it to the families to be as — to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal."

Golf, sir? Golf sends the wrong signal to the grieving families of our men and women butchered in Iraq? Do you think these families, Mr. Bush, their lives blighted forever, care about you playing golf? Do you think, sir, they care about you?

You, Mr. Bush, let their sons and daughters be killed. Sir, to show your solidarity with them you gave up golf? Sir, to show your solidarity with them you didn't give up your pursuit of this insurance-scam, profiteering, morally and financially bankrupting war.

Sir, to show your solidarity with them you didn't even give up talking about Iraq, a subject about which you have incessantly proved without pause or backwards glance, that you may literally be the least informed person in the world?

Sir, to show your solidarity with them, you didn't give up your presidency? In your own words"solidarity as best as I can" is to stop a game? That is the "best" you can do?

Four thousand Americans give up their lives and your sacrifice was to give up golf! Golf. Not "Gulf" — golf.

And still it gets worse. Because it proves that the president's unendurable sacrifice, his unbearable pain, the suspension of getting to hit a ball with a stick, was not even his own damned idea.

"Mr. President, was there a particular moment or incident that brought you to that decision, or how did you come to that?"

"I remember when [diplomat Sergio Vieira] de Mello, who was at the U.N., got killed in Baghdad as a result of these murderers taking this good man's life. And I was playing golf, I think I was in central Texas, and they pulled me off the golf course and I said, it's just not worth it any more to do."

Your one, tone-deaf, arrogant, pathetic, embarrassing gesture, and you didn't even think of it yourself? The great Bushian sacrifice — an Army private loses a leg, a Marine loses half his skull, 4,000 of their brothers and sisters lose their lives — and you lose golf, and they have to pull you off the golf course to get you to just do that?

If it's even true.

Apart from your medical files, which dutifully record your torn calf muscle and the knee pain which forced you to give up running at the same time — coincidence, no doubt — the bombing in Baghdad which killed Sergio Vieira de Mello of the U.N. and interrupted your round of golf was on Aug. 19, 2003.

Yet CBS News has records of you playing golf as late as Oct. 13 of that year, nearly two months later.

Mr. Bush, I hate to break it to you 6 1/2 years after you yoked this nation and your place in history to the wrong war, in the wrong place, against the wrong people, but the war in Iraq is not about you.

It is not, Mr. Bush, about your grief when American after American comes home in a box.

It is not, Mr. Bush, about what your addled brain has produced in the way of paranoid delusions of risks that do not exist, ready to be activated if some Democrat, and not your twin Mr. McCain, succeeds you.

The war in Iraq, your war, Mr. Bush, is about how you accomplished the derangement of two nations, and how you helped funnel billions of taxpayer dollars to lascivious and perennially thirsty corporations like Halliburton and Blackwater, and how you sent 4,000 Americans to their deaths for nothing.

It is not, Mr. Bush, about your golf game! And, sir, if you have any hopes that next Jan. 20 will not be celebrated as a day of soul-wrenching, heart-felt thanksgiving, because your faithless stewardship of this presidency will have finally come to a merciful end, this last piece of advice:

When somebody asks you, sir, about Democrats who must now pull this country back from the abyss you have placed us at ...

When somebody asks you, sir, about the cooked books and faked threats you foisted on a sincere and frightened nation …

When somebody asks you, sir, about your gallant, noble, self-abnegating sacrifice of your golf game so as to soothe the families of the war dead.

This advice, Mr. Bush: Shut the hell up!

Louis V Gutierrez: "If the new President comes for the Muslims, I will be a Muslim", speech to Congress about Donald Trump - 2017

10 January 2017, Congress, Washington D.C., USA

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you where I will not be on inauguration day.  I will not be here or outside at the inauguration ceremony.

I will be in Washington late that evening because the event I am going to is on January 21st.  It is the Women’s March on Washington.

You can get more information on Facebook which is how I heard about it.

Or I should say, how my wife Soraida heard about it.

I said to her a little after election day, I said, “You know honey, I don’t think I can go to DC and watch Donald Trump get sworn in,” and she said, “oh you’re going to Washington, just not for that” and she told me about the women’s march.

She said you and I are going together.

Now, I can already hear the phones ringing in my office with people calling to say, “Oh, you Democrats are sore losers and you just hate Republicans.”

No.  I went to two George Bush inaugurations and I work with Republicans all the time.  Just read Breitbart which seems to write an article anytime I even glance favorably at a Republican colleague.

But this is different.

I knew that George W. Bush and I would disagree on many issues from trade to health care to the war in Iraq, but I never thought George W. Bush was trying to make my own country hostile to me, my wife, my daughters and my grandson.  I never felt he was a threat to the nation I love so deeply and have served now for almost a quarter century.

The reason I am not going is that I cannot bring myself to justify morally or intellectually the immense power we are placing in that man’s hands. 

I could not look at my wife, my daughters or my grandson in the eye if I sat there and attended as if everything that candidate Donald Trump had said about The women, about The Latinos, or The Blacks, The Muslims or any of the other things he said in his speeches and Tweets – that any of that is OK or erased from my memory.

We all heard the tape when Donald Trump was bragging – bragging – about grabbing women by their private parts without their consent. 

It is something I can never un-hear.

Bragging to that guy on TV that he would grab women below the belt as a way of hitting on them.

Sorry.  That is never OK.

It is never just locker room talk.

It is offensive and, if he ever actually did it, it is criminal.

I hang out with Republicans - with Republican elected-officials…in an actual locker room in the Rayburn Building and if they ever started talking like that, I wouldn’t just walk away, I would tell them to their faces why they are wrong and I would not allow it to go unnoticed or be dismissed as normal or excusable.  I don’t know a Republican Member of this body who would let that type of comment just slide by as if it were OK.

So that’s why I will hold hands with my wife and march with the women on January 21st in Washington.

And that is why I am calling on all of my progressive allies to come march with the women as well.

If you care about a living wage, come join the women.  If you care about the environment, come join the march.

We know as a society, when women win, we all win, so I plan to be there

It is deeply personal and deeply patriotic to march, to make my opinions known by walking with my allies arm-in-arm.

I want to be able to look my two beautiful Latina daughters and my beautiful half-Puerto Rican/half-Mexican, 100% American grandson in the eye with a clear conscience.

When the new President denigrates Latinos or Mexicans or immigrants as drug-dealers and criminals, I want to be able to say I did not condone or allow that type of speech to go mainstream; That was not normalized on my watch.

Because the future President said the American-born children of immigrants were not capable of being American judges, I cannot sit there at his inauguration as if that is OK and I forgive him.

I am deeply honored to return to the U.S. Congress, and I want to thank the people of the Fourth District for the trust and confidence they have placed in me. 

My constituents knew when they voted for me that I would be a fighter and I cannot let them down.

If the new President comes for the Muslims, I will be a Muslim.

If they come for Planned Parenthood, I will stand with Planned Parenthood.

When they deny climate science, I will make my voice heard.

I will use whatever peaceful means available to make sure the words and actions of our new President do not become the new mainstream.

And that, Mr. Speaker, is why I will not be here for the inauguration and why I will be marching with women from across the country.

Joe Biden: 'I've always had someone to lean on', accepting Presidential Medal of Freedom - 2016

12 January 2016, White House, Washington D.C., USA

(The Medal of Freedom is presented.)  (Applause.)
 
THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Mr. President.  (Applause.)  Please, please, thank you.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Please.  Thank you. 
 
Ricchetti, you're fired.  (Laughter.)  For the press, Ricchetti is my chief of staff.  (Laughter.)
 
I had no inkling.  I thought we were coming over, Michelle, to -- for you, Jill, and Barack and I and a couple of senior staff to toast one another and say what an incredible journey it’s been.
 
Mr. President, you got right the part about my leaning on Jill.  But I’ve also leaned on you and a lot of people in this room.  I look around the room, and I see great friends like Ted Kaufman, who has been -- has so much wisdom.  Guys like Mel Monzack.  I look around here and I’m startled.  I keep seeing people I don't expect.  Madam President, how are you?  Mr. President, look at my new boss over there.  (Laughter.) 
 
But you know, I get a lot of credit I don't deserve, to state the obvious and -- because I’ve always had somebody to lean on.  From back that time in 1972, when the accident happened, I leaned on -- and I mean this in literal sense; Chris knows this -- Dodd knows this, and Mel knows this, and Ted knows this -- I leaned on my sons Beau and Hunter.  And I continue to lean on Hunter who continues to in a bizarre kind of way raise me.  I mean I’ve leaned on them.
 
And, Mr. President, you observed early on that when either one of my boys would walk in the room, they’d walk up and say, Dad, what can I get you?  Dad, what do you need?  
 
And then Jill came along, and she saved our lives.  She -- no man deserves one great love, let alone two.  And -- but everybody knows here, I am Jill’s husband.  Everybody knows that I love her more than she loves me.  (Laughter.)  With good reason.  (Laughter.)  And she gave me the most precious gift, the love of my life, the life of my love, my daughter, Ashley.
 
And I continue to lean on the family.  Mr. President, you kidded me once.  You heard that the preparation for the two debates -- vice presidential debates that I had -- I only had two that Beau and Hunt would be the last people in the room.  And Beau would say, look at me, Dad.  Look at me.  Remember, remember home base.  Remember.  
 
And the Secret Service can tell you, Mr. President, that Beau and Hunt and Ashley continue to have to corral me.  We were at one of the national parks, and I was climbing up on top of a bridge to jump off the bridge with a bunch of young kids.  And I hear my sons yelling, Dad, get down.  Now!  (Laughter.)  And I just started laughing so hard I couldn’t stop.  And I said, I was just going to do a flip -- a full gainer off here.  
 
He said, Dad, the Secret Service doesn't want you up there.  Dad.  Look at me, Dad.  (Laughter.)  
 
So we've never figured out who the father is in this family.  (Laughter.) 
 
And, Mr. President, you know that with good reason there is no power in the vice presidency.  Matter of fact I just did for Nancy Pelosi’s daughter a reading of the Constitution.  You probably did one for her.  And they had me read the provisions relating to the vice presidency in the Constitution.  And there is no inherent power, nor should there be.
 
But, Mr. President, you have more than kept your commitment to me by saying that you wanted me to help govern.  The President’s line often -- other people don't hear it that often, but when someone would say, can you get Joe to do such and such.  He says, I don't do his schedule.  He doesn't do mine.  
 
Every single thing you've asked me to do, Mr. President, you have trusted me to do.  And that is -- that's a remarkable thing.  I don't think according to -- I see the President of Georgetown here, as well.  I don't think according to the presidential, vice presidential scholars that kind of relationship has existed. I mean, for real.  It’s all you, Mr. President.  It’s all you.
 
The reason why when you send me around the world, nothing gets -- as my mom would say, gets missed between the cup and the lip, it’s because they know when I speak, I speak for you.  
 
And it’s been easy, Mr. President, because we not only have the same political philosophy and ideology, I tell everybody -- and I’ve told them from the beginning.  And I’m not saying this to reciprocate.  I’ve never known a President and few people I’ve ever met my whole life -- I can count on less than one hand -- who have had the integrity and the decency and the sense of other people’s needs like you do.  
 
I know you were upset when I told the story about when Hunt and I were worried that Beau would have to -- that he would, as a matter of honor, decide he had to step down as attorney general while he was fighting his battle because he had aphasia.  He was losing his ability to speak, and he didn't want to ever be in a position where to him everything was about duty and honor. 
 
And I said, and he may resign.  I don't know I just have the feeling he may.  And Hunt and I had talked about this.  And I said, he doesn't have any other income, but we're all right because Hunt’s there, and I can sell the house.  
 
We were having a private lunch like we do once a week.  And this man got up, came over, grabbed me by the shoulders, looked me in the eye, and said, don't you sell that house.  You love that house.
 
I said, it’s no big deal, Mr. President.  He said, I’ll give you the money.  We’ll give you the money.  Promise me, promise me you won’t sell that house.
 
I remember when Ashley, Mr. President, we were in the Oval, and Ashley was in an elevator, and the elevator plummeted to the -- she was with a group of people -- I forget which building in Philadelphia, and it plummeted to the ground.  And immediately the Service was worried that she may have been badly hurt.  And I got up to take the call, and you didn't let up until you made sure your service followed through and made sure everything was all right.
 
But you know, Mr. President, we kid about both about marrying up.  We both did, that kind of thing.  But the truth of the matter is -- I said this to Michelle last night.  Michelle is the finest First Lady in my view that has ever served in the office.  There’s been other great First Ladies, but I really genuinely mean it.  (Applause.) 
 
When I got to meet Michelle’s brother, and he told me about how you guys were raised, and I got to know and love your mom, if your mom -- were your mom 15 years older, she could have been my mom.  Literally, the way you were raised, the way we were raised, there wasn’t any difference.  And I knew that this decision to join you, which was the greatest honor of my life, was the right decision on the night we had to go and accept the nomination, the formal -- we’d be nominated at the convention.  And Finnegan, who is now 18 years old, was then 10 years old.  And she came to me, and she said, Pop, is it okay if the room that we're in -- Finnegan, Maisy, and Naomi -- that we have the beds taken out.  And I said, why?  She said, maybe the Obama girls and your brothers’ children, maybe they would come down, all sleep together in sleeping bags.  (Laughter.)  And I give you my word as a Biden, I knew when I left to go to the convention, open that door, and saw them cuddled together, I knew this was the right decision.  I knew it was the right decision.  I really did.  Because, Mr. President, the same values set -- the same values set.
 
Folks, you know, I joke with my staff that I don't know why they pay them anything, because they get to advise me.  (Laughter.)  Let me explain what I mean by that.  As the President of the University of Delaware, where my heart resides, and my home campus of Delaware, as he can tell you, it's -- I get to give you advice.  I get to be the last guy in the room and give you advice on the most difficult decisions anyone has to make in the whole world.  But I get to walk out, and you make it all by yourself.  All by yourself.  
 
Harry Truman was right about the buck stopping at the desk.  And I've never, never, never, never, never, never, never, never once doubted, on these life and death decisions, I never once doubted that your judgement was flawed -- not once.  Not once.  
 
And we've disagreed, and we've argued, and we've raised our voices, one of which we made a deal we'd be completely open like brothers with one another.  But, Mr. President, I watched you under intense fire.  I will venture to say that no President in history has had as many novel crises land on his desk in all of history.  The Civil War was worse, the World War Two was worse, but, Mr. President, almost every one of the crises you faced was a case of first instance -- a case of first instance.  And I watched that prodigious mind and that heart as big as your head -- I've watched you.  I've watched how you've acted.
 
When you see a woman or man under intense pressure, you get a measure -- and you know that, Michelle, and your daughters know it, as well.  This is a remarkable man.  And I just hope that the asterisk in history that is attached to my name when they talk about this presidency is that I can say I was part of the journey of a remarkable man who did remarkable things for this country.  (Applause.)
 
You know, I can't let a comment go by without quoting an Irish poet.  (Laughter.)  Jill and I talk about why you were able to develop the way you developed and with the heart you have.  Michelle and I have talked about it.  I've confided in Michelle, I've gone to her for advice.  We've talked about this man.  You give me insight.  And I think it's because -- Mr. President, you gave me credit for having understanding other people's misery and suffering.  Mr. President, there is not one single, solitary ounce of entitlement in you, or Michelle, or your beautiful daughters -- and you girls are incredible, you really are.  That’s not hyperbole, you really are.  Not one ounce of entitlement.
 
And Seamus Heaney in one of his poems said -- (laughter) -- when you can find someone who says it better, use it.  He said, you carried your own burden and very soon, your symptoms of creeping privilege disappeared.  You carried your own burdens, and very soon, the creeping symptoms of privilege disappeared.
 
Mr. President, you have sometimes been like a lone wolf, but you carried yourself in a way that’s pretty remarkable.  The history of the journey -- your journey -- is something people are going to write about a long time, and I’m not being solicitous when I say this.  And you’re so fortunate, both of you, to have found each other because all that grounding, all that you have, made this guy totally whole.  And it’s pretty amazing.
 
Mr. President, this honor is not only well beyond what I deserve, but it’s a reflection on the extent and generosity of your spirit.  I don’t deserve this, but I know it came from the President’s heart.  There is a Talmudic saying that says, what comes from the heart, enters the heart.  Mr. President, you have creeped into our heart -- you and your whole family, including Mom -- and you occupy it.  It’s an amazing thing that happened.  I knew how smart you were.  I knew how honorable you were.  I knew how decent you were from the couple years we worked in the Senate, and I knew what you were capable of.  But I never fully expected that you’d occupy the Bidens’ heart, from Hunter, to Ashley, my sister, all of us.  All of us.
 
And Mr. President, I’m indebted to you.  I’m indebted to your friendship, I’m indebted to your family, and as I’ll tell you -- I’ll end on a humorous note.  We’re having a lunch -- lunches, and mostly it’s what’s ever in either one of our minds.  We’ll talk about family an awful lot.  And about six months in, President looks at me, he said, you know, Joe, you know what surprised me?  How we’ve become such good friends.  (Laughter.)  And I said, surprised you?  (Laughter.)
 
But that is candid Obama, and it’s real, and, Mr. President, you know as long as there’s a breath in me, I’ll be there for you, my whole family will be, and I know, I know it is reciprocal.  And I want to thank you all so very, very, very much.  All of you in here.  (Applause.)
 

Michelle Obama: 'I want our young people to know that they matter', last speech as First Lady - 2016

5 November 2016, White House, Washington D.C., USA

OBAMA: Hey! (Applause.) What’s going on? (Applause.) Thank you all so much. You guys, that’s a command — rest yourselves. (Laughter.) We’re almost at the end. (Laughter.) Hello, everyone. And, may I say for the last time officially, welcome to the White House. Yes! (Applause.) Well, we are beyond thrilled to have you all here to celebrate the 2017 National School Counselor of the Year, as well as all of our State Counselors of the Year. These are the fine women, and a few good men — (laughter) — one good man — who are on this stage, and they represent schools from across this country.

And I want to start by thanking Terri for that wonderful introduction and her right-on-the-spot remarks. I’m going to say a lot more about Terri in a few minutes, but first I want to take a moment to acknowledge a few people who are here.

First, our outstanding Secretary of Education, John King. (Applause.) As well as our former Education Secretary, Arne Duncan. (Applause.) I want to take this time to thank you both publicly for your dedication and leadership and friendship. We couldn’t do this without the support of the Department of Education under both of your leadership. So I’m grateful to you personally, and very proud of all that you’ve done for this country.

I also want to acknowledge a few other special guests we have in the audience. We’ve got a pretty awesome crew. As one of my staff said, “You roll pretty deep.” (Laughter.) I’m like, well, yeah, we have a few good friends. We have with us today Ted Allen, La La Anthony, Connie Britton, Andy Cohen — yeah, Andy Cohen is here — (laughter) — Carla Hall, Coach Jim Harbaugh and his beautiful wife, who’s a lot better looking than him — (laughter) — Lana Parrilla, my buddy Jay Pharoah, Kelly Rowland, Usher —

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Woo!

MRS. OBAMA: Keep it down. (Laughter.) Keep it together, ladies. Wale is here. And of course, Allison Williams and her mom are here.

And all these folks are here because they’re using their star power to inspire our young people. And I’m so grateful to all of you for stepping up in so many ways on so many occasions. I feel like I’ve pestered you over these years, asking time and time again, “Well, where are you going to be?” “I’m going to be in New York.” “Can you come? Can you come here? Can you do this? Can you take that? Can you ask for that? Can you come? Can we rap? Can we sing?” (Laughter.) So thank you all so much. It really means the world to this initiative to have such powerful, respected and admired individuals speaking on behalf of this issue. So congratulations on the work that you’ve done, and we’re going to keep working.

And today, I especially want to recognize all these — extraordinary leadership team that was behind Reach Higher from day one. And this isn’t on the script so they don’t know this. I want to take time to personally acknowledge a couple of people. Executive Director Eric Waldo. (Applause.) Where is Eric? He’s in the — you’ve got to step out. (Applause.) Eric is acting like he’s a ham, but he likes the spotlight. (Laughter.) He’s acting a little shy. I want to recognize our Deputy Director, Stephanie Sprow. Stephanie. (Applause.) And he’s really not going to like this because he tries to pretend like he doesn’t exist at all, but our Senior Advisor, Greg Darnieder. (Applause.) There you go. Greg has been a leader in education his entire life. I’ve known him since I was a little organizer person. And it’s just been just a joy to work with you all. These individuals, they are brilliant. They are creative. They have worked miracles with hardly any staff or budget to speak of — which is how we roll in the First Lady’s Office. (Laughter.) And I am so proud and so, so grateful to you all for everything that you’ve done. So let’s give them a round of applause. (Applause.)

And finally, I want to recognize all of you who are here in this audience. We have our educators, our leaders, our young people who have been with us since we launched Reach Higher back in 2014. Now, when we first came up with this idea, we had one clear goal in mind: We wanted to make higher education cool. We wanted to change the conversation around what it means and what it takes to be a success in this country. Because let’s be honest, if we’re always shining the spotlight on professional athletes or recording artists or Hollywood celebrities, if those are the only achievements we celebrate, then why would we ever think kids would see college as a priority?

So we decided to flip the script and shine a big, bright spotlight on all things educational. For example, we made College Signing Day a national event. We wanted to mimic all the drama and excitement traditionally reserved for those few amazing football and basketball players choosing their college and university teams. We wanted to focus that same level of energy and attention on kids going to college because of their academic achievements. Because as a nation, that’s where the spotlight should also be — on kids who work hard in school and do the right thing when no one is watching, many beating daunting odds.

Next, we launched Better Make Room. It’s a social media campaign to give young people the support and inspiration they need to actually complete higher education. And to really drive that message home, you may recall that I debuted my music career — (laughter) — rapping with Jay about getting some knowledge by going to college. (Laughter and applause.)

We are also very proud of all that this administration has done to make higher education more affordable. We doubled investments in Pell grants and college tax credits. We expanded income-based loan repayment options for tens of millions of students. We made it easier to apply for financial aid. We created a College Scorecard to help students make good decisions about higher education. And we provided new funding and support for school counselors. (Applause.) Altogether, we made in this administration the largest investment in higher education since the G.I. Bill. (Applause.) And today, the high school graduation rate is at a record high, and more young people than ever before are going to college.

And we know that school counselors like all of the folks standing with me on this stage have played a critical role in helping us get there. In fact, a recent study showed that students who met with a school counselor to talk about financial aid or college were three times more likely to attend college, and they were nearly seven times more likely to apply for financial aid.

So our school counselors are truly among the heroes of the Reach Higher story. And that’s why we created this event two years ago, because we thought that they should finally get some recognition. (Applause.) We wanted everyone to know about the difference that these phenomenal men and women have been making in the lives of our young people every day. And our 2017 School Counselor of the Year, Terri Tchorzynski, is a perfect example.

As you heard, Terri works at the Calhoun Area Career Center, a career and technical education school in Michigan. And here’s what Terri’s principal said about her in his letter of recommendation. He said, “Once she identifies a systemic need, she works tirelessly to address it.”

So when students at Terri’s school reported feeling unprepared to apply for higher education, Terri sprang into action to create a school-wide, top-to-bottom college-readiness effort. Under Terri’s leadership, more students than ever before attended workshops on resume writing, FAFSA completion — yes, I can now say FAFSA — (laughter) — and interview preparation. I can barely say it. (Laughter.) They did career and personal — personality assessments. They helped plan a special college week. And they organized a Military Day, hosting recruiters from all branches of our armed forces. And because of these efforts, today, 75 percent of Calhoun’s seniors now complete key college application steps, and Terri’s school has won state and national recognition.

And all of this is just one small part of what Terri does for her students each day. I can go on and on about all the time she spends one-on-one with students, helping them figure out their life path. Terri told us — as you heard, she told us about one of those students, so we reached out to Kyra. And here’s what Kyra had to say in her own words. Kyra wrote that “Mrs. Tchorzynski has helped me grow to love myself. She helped me with my doubts and insecurities.” She said, my life has changed “for the better in all aspects.” Kyra said, “She held my hand through my hardest times.” She said, “Mrs. Tchorzynski is my lifesaver.” That’s what Kyra said. (Laughter.)

And this is what each of you do every single day. You see the promise in each of your students. You believe in them even when they can’t believe in themselves, and you work tirelessly to help them be who they were truly meant to be. And you do it all in the face of some overwhelming challenges — tight budgets, impossible student- counselor ratios — yeah, amen — (laughter) — endless demands on your time.

You all come in early, you stay late. You reach into your own pockets — and see, we’ve got the amen corner. (Laughter.) You stick with students in their darkest moments, when they’re most anxious and afraid. And if anyone is dealing with a college [high school] senior or junior, you know what this feels like. These men and women show them that those kids matter; that they have something to offer; that no matter where they’re from or how much money their parents have, no matter what they look like or who they love or how they worship or what language they speak at home, they have a place in this country.

And as I end my time in the White House, I can think of no better message to send our young people in my last official remarks as First Lady. So for all the young people in this room and those who are watching, know that this country belongs to you — to all of you, from every background and walk of life. If you or your parents are immigrants, know that you are part of a proud American tradition — the infusion of new cultures, talents and ideas, generation after generation, that has made us the greatest country on earth.

If your family doesn’t have much money, I want you to remember that in this country, plenty of folks, including me and my husband — we started out with very little. But with a lot of hard work and a good education, anything is possible — even becoming President. That’s what the American Dream is all about. (Applause.)

If you are a person of faith, know that religious diversity is a great American tradition, too. In fact, that’s why people first came to this country — to worship freely. And whether you are Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh — these religions are teaching our young people about justice, and compassion, and honesty. So I want our young people to continue to learn and practice those values with pride. You see, our glorious diversity — our diversities of faiths and colors and creeds — that is not a threat to who we are, it makes us who we are. (Applause.) So the young people here and the young people out there: Do not ever let anyone make you feel like you don’t matter, or like you don’t have a place in our American story — because you do. And you have a right to be exactly who you are. But I also want to be very clear: This right isn’t just handed to you. No, this right has to be earned every single day. You cannot take your freedoms for granted. Just like generations who have come before you, you have to do your part to preserve and protect those freedoms. And that starts right now, when you’re young.

Right now, you need to be preparing yourself to add your voice to our national conversation. You need to prepare yourself to be informed and engaged as a citizen, to serve and to lead, to stand up for our proud American values and to honor them in your daily lives. And that means getting the best education possible so you can think critically, so you can express yourself clearly, so you can get a good job and support yourself and your family, so you can be a positive force in your communities.

And when you encounter obstacles — because I guarantee you, you will, and many of you already have — when you are struggling and you start thinking about giving up, I want you to remember something that my husband and I have talked about since we first started this journey nearly a decade ago, something that has carried us through every moment in this White House and every moment of our lives, and that is the power of hope — the belief that something better is always possible if you’re willing to work for it and fight for it.

It is our fundamental belief in the power of hope that has allowed us to rise above the voices of doubt and division, of anger and fear that we have faced in our own lives and in the life of this country. Our hope that if we work hard enough and believe in ourselves, then we can be whatever we dream, regardless of the limitations that others may place on us. The hope that when people see us for who we truly are, maybe, just maybe they, too, will be inspired to rise to their best possible selves.

That is the hope of students like Kyra who fight to discover their gifts and share them with the world. It’s the hope of school counselors like Terri and all these folks up here who guide those students every step of the way, refusing to give up on even a single young person. Shoot, it’s the hope of my — folks like my dad who got up every day to do his job at the city water plant; the hope that one day, his kids would go to college and have opportunities he never dreamed of.

That’s the kind of hope that every single one of us — politicians, parents, preachers — all of us need to be providing for our young people. Because that is what moves this country forward every single day — our hope for the future and the hard work that hope inspires.

So that’s my final message to young people as First Lady. It is simple. (Applause.) I want our young people to know that they matter, that they belong. So don’t be afraid — you hear me, young people? Don’t be afraid. Be focused. Be determined. Be hopeful. Be empowered. Empower yourselves with a good education, then get out there and use that education to build a country worthy of your boundless promise. Lead by example with hope, never fear. And know that I will be with you, rooting for you and working to support you for the rest of my life.

And that is true I know for every person who are here — is here today, and for educators and advocates all across this nation who get up every day and work their hearts out to lift up our young people. And I am so grateful to all of you for your passion and your dedication and all the hard work on behalf of our next generation. And I can think of no better way to end my time as First Lady than celebrating with all of you.

So I want to close today by simply saying thank you. Thank you for everything you do for our kids and for our country. Being your First Lady has been the greatest honor of my life, and I hope I’ve made you proud.

Charles Haughey: 'We are living away beyond our means', televised address -

9 January 1980,

I wish to talk to you this evening about the state of the nation’s affairs and the picture I have to paint is not, unfortunately, a very cheerful one.

The figures which are now just becoming available to us show one thing very clearly. As a community we are living away beyond our means. I do not mean that everyone in the community is living too well. Clearly many are not and have barely enough to get by. But taking us all together, we have been living at a rate which is simply not justified by the amount of goods and services we are producing.

To make up the difference, we have been borrowing enormous amounts of money, borrowing at a rat which just cannot continue. As few simple figures will make this very clear.

At home, the government’s current income from taxes and all other sources in 1979 fell short of what was needed to pay the running costs of the state by about £520m million. To meet this and our capital programme, we had to borrow in 1979 over £1000 million. That amount equals to one-seventh of our entire national output.

The situation in regard to our trading with the outside world in 1979 was bad also. Our income from abroad fell short of what we had to pay out by about £760 million which led to a fall in our reserves.

To fully understand our situation, we must look not just on the home scene but also on the troubled and unstable world around us. There are wars and rumours or wars. There is political instability in some of the most important areas of the world. A very serious threat exists to the world’s future supply of energy. We can no longer be sure that we will be able to go on paying the prices now being demanded for all the oil and other fuels we require to keep our factories going and to keep our homes and institutions supplied with light, heat and power they need. We will, of course push exploration for our own oil ahead as rapidly as possible but in the short term the burden of oil prices will continue to be a crushing one.

All this indicates that we must, first of all, as a matter of urgency, set about putting our domestic affairs in order and secondly, improving our trade with the rest of the world on so far as we can do so.

We will have to continue to cut down on government spending. The government is taking far too much by way of taxes from individual members of the community. But even this amount is not enough to meet our commitments. We will just have to reorganise government spending so that we can only undertake the things which we can afford.

In trying to bring government expenditure within manageable proportions, we will, of course, be paying particular attention to the needs of the poorer and weaker sections of the community and make sure they are looked after. Other essential community expenditure will have to be undertaken also. But there are many things which will just have to be curtailed or postponed, until such time as we can get the financial situation right.

There is one things above all else which we can do to help get the situation right and which is entirely within our control. I refer to industrial relations. Any further serious interruption in production, or in the provision of essential services, in 1980 would be a major disaster. I believe that everyone listening to me tonight shares my anxiety about our situation in that respect.

Strikes, go-slows, work-to-rule, stoppages in key industries and essentials services, were too often a feature of life in 1979. They caused suffering and hardship; at time it looked as if we were becoming one of those countries where basic services could not be relied upon to operate as part of normal life.

Immediately following my election as Taoiseach, I received countless messages from all over the country from people in every walk of life, appealing to me to do something about this situation.

Let us clearly understand, however that this is not a one-sided affair. Managements that do not give first-class attention to their firm’s industrial relations, who ignore situations and let them drift into confrontation, are just as blameworthy as the handful of wild men who slap an unofficial picket and stop thousands of workers from earning their living.

Apportioning blame, however, is not going to get us anywhere. What we need is a new way forward and that is my primary purpose, as head of government, in talking to you tonight.

Taoiseach John Bruton: 'The murder of a journalist in the course of her work is sinister in the extreme', statement following murder of Veronica Guerin - 1996

26 June 1996, Dublin, Ireland

We are shocked when we hear of the death of any young person. We are even more shocked when we hear that her death was a result of murder, in cold blood, in broad daylight, on a roadside in Dublin. What makes it even more shocking is to hear that the young person murdered was an investigative reporter who was known for her determination to go about her business in a courageous, innovative and committed way. On behalf of the Government and on my own behalf I extend my deepest sympathy to her husband Graham, to her son, Cathal, and to the parents, family, friends and journalistic colleagues of Veronica Guerin. I telephoned my sympathy to the Sunday Independent and to the general secretary of the National Union of Journalists.

We in this House knew Veronica Guerin best as a journalist, but some Members will recall her contribution to the Forum for a New Ireland in 1982 and 1983. That was an early indication from a talented young person of her interest in Irish public life. Deputies opposite will be especially aware of her work for the Fianna Fáil delegation. Deputies in other parties who attended the forum will recall her tact, friendship and diplomacy as the forum sought to reach agreement, which it did, on a very important report. That agreement was greatly facilitated by the work of the late Veronica Guerin.

Her work in recent times established her as a particular gifted and professional investigative journalist. She wrote about the unacceptable face of life, about murders, drug dealing and crime. She did so with care and compassion. In doing so she made an important contribution to public life. Without the work she did, much of the recent public debate on crime would not have been as well informed as it was.

Her contribution to journalism was recognised not just at home but also abroad. In December 1995, Veronica won the prestigious International Press Freedom Award, and when it was being conferred on her at a ceremony in New York, she was cited for her fearless courage and determination. Veronica Guerin was a gifted journalist. Arising out of the work she was doing, her life was previously threatened, and she was attacked on at least three occasions. In February last year she was shot in her home, no doubt to discourage her from a particular line of journalistic investigation. From her hospital bed she said, on that occasion, “I won't be intimidated”, and she was not. She was not deterred. She continued her work undaunted and undiminished in her enthusiasm, despite this bloody intimidation.

The murder of a journalist in the course of her work is sinister in the extreme. Someone, somewhere, decided to take her life, and almost certainly did so to prevent information coming into the public arena. Journalism is a vital and well established element in our democracy. This country benefits from a strong, free media. The independence of the media is one of the hallmarks of a strong and vibrant democracy. Journalists must be independent not only of political influence, commercial influence, personal or sectoral influence; journalists must also now be independent of threats and terror from what-ever source. That a journalist should be callously murdered in the line of duty is an attack on democracy, because it is an attack on one of the pillars of our democracy. The full resources of the State will be brought to bear in bringing to justice those responsible for today's murder. Veronica Guerin deserves no less. Her family and friends, many of them in this House, deserve no less. Her journalistic colleagues deserve no less. The best tribute we can pay to her life and to her work is to redouble our efforts in the defence of democracy.

On a personal note, there is little that can be said on this occasion that can be of any immediate consolation to Veronica's husband, Graham, or to her small son, Cathal, who must now grow up to adulthood without his mother, but it may in time be some small consolation to them for it to be recalled to them the unparalleled shock seen on the faces of Deputies on all sides in this House when, some time this morning, the news of Veronica's killing spread through the House. Members felt this loss in a very personal way. Those expressions of utter speechlessness and utter inability to comprehend what had happened speak perhaps more eloquently than anything we can say now of the contribution that Veronica Guerin made during her all too short life, to the public life of this country. That knowledge may, in time, be of some small consolation to the people who suffer her loss so grievously now and for whom no words of consolation at this stage can serve.

Indira Gandhi: 'You and your husband both had foreseen that death might come to him violently', Presentation of Nehru Award to Coretta Scott King - 1969

24 January 1969, New Dehli, India

This is a poignant moment for all of us. We remember vividly your last visit to our country. We had hoped that on this occasion, Dr. King and you would be standing side by side on this platform. That was not to be. He is not with us but we feel his spirit. We admired Dr. King. We felt his loss as our own. The tragedy rekindled memories of the great martyrs of all time who gave their lives so that men might live and grow. We thought of the great men in your own country who fell to the assassin's bullet and of Mahatma Gandhi's martyrdom here in this city, this very month, twenty-one years ago. Such events remain as wounds in the human consciousness, reminding us of battles, yet to be fought and tasks still to be accomplished. We should not mourn for men of high ideals. Rather we should rejoice that we had the privilege of having had them with us, to inspire us by their radiant personalities. So today we are gathered not to offer you grief, but to salute a man who achieved so much in so short a time. It is befitting, Madam, that you whom he called the "courage by my side", you who gave him strength and encouragement in his historic mission, should be with us to receive this award.

You and your husband both had foreseen that death might come to him violently. It was perhaps inherent in the situation. Dr. King chose death for the theme of a sermon, remarking that he would like to be remembered as a drum major for justice, for peace and for righteousness. When you were once asked what you would do if your husband were assassinated, you were courage personified, replying that you might weep but the work would go on. Your face of sorrow, so beautiful in its dignity coupled with infinite compassion, will forever be engraved in our hearts.

Mahatma Gandhi also had foreseen his end and had prepared himself for it. Just as training for violence included learning to kill, the training for non-violence, he said, included learning how to die. The true badge of the satyagrahi is to be unafraid.

As if he too had envisaged the martyrdoms of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Rabindranath Tagore once sang:

In anger we slew him,

With love let us embrace him now,

For in death he lives again amongst us,

The mighty conqueror of death.

This award, Madam, is the highest tribute our nation can bestow on work for understanding and brotherhood among men. It is named after a man who himself was a peace-maker and who all his life laboured passionately for freedom, justice and peace in India and throughout the world. Dr. Martin Luther King's struggle was for these same values. He paid for his ideals with his blood, forging a new bond among the brave and the conscientious of all races and all nations.

Dr. King's dream embraced the poor and the oppressed of all lands. His work ennobled us. He spoke of the right of man to survive and recognized three threats to the survival of man--racial injustice, poverty and war. He realised that even under the lamp of affluence which was held aloft by science, lay the shadow of poverty, compelling two-thirds of the peoples of the world to exist in hunger and want. He proclaimed that mankind could be saved from war only if we cared enough for peace to sacrifice for it.

Dr. Martin Luther King drew his inspiration from Christ, and his method of action from Mahatma Gandhi. Only through truth can untruth be vanquished. Only through love can hatred be quenched. This is the path of the Buddha and of Christ, and in our own times, that of Mahatma Gandhi and of Martin Luther King.

They believed in the equality of all men. No more false doctrine has been spread than that of the superiority of one race over another. It is ironical that there should still be people in this world who judge men not by their moral worth and intellectual merit but by the pigment of their skin or other physical characteristics.

Some governments still rest on the theory of racist superiority--such as the governments of South Africa and the lawless regime in Rhodesia. Unregenerate groups in other countries consider one colour superior to another. Our own battle is not yet over. Caste and other prejudices still survive, but most of us are ashamed of them and recognise them as evils to be combated. We are trying hard to eradicate them.

While there is bondage anywhere, we ourselves cannot be fully free. While there is oppression anywhere, we ourselves cannot soar high. Martin Luther King was convinced that one day the misguided people who believed in racial superiority would realise the error of their ways. His dream was that white and black, brown and yellow would live and grow together as flowers in a garden with their faces turned towards the sun. As you yourself said, "All of us who believe in what Martin Luther King stood for, must see to it that his spirit never dies". That spirit can never die. There may be setbacks in our fight for the equality of all men. There may be moments of gloom. But victory must and will be ours. Let us not rest until the equality of all races and religions becomes a living fact. That is the most effective and lasting tribute that we can pay to Dr. King.