Barney Cam VII: A Red, White and Blue Christmas (2008) VIDEO

Barney and Miss Beazley follow President George W. Bush along the West Wing Colonnade Wednesday, July 23, 2008, on the way back to the Oval Office at the White House. White House photo by Joyce Boghosian

Barney Cam VII: A Red, White and Blue Christmas (2008), FULL STREAMING VIDEO Barney, the President's Scottish Terrier, was born on September 30, 2000. Although just eight years old, Barney has starred in nine "films" and has lived quite an exciting life... Miss Beazley, a Scottish Terrier, arrived at the White House on January 6, 2005 as a birthday present from the President to Mrs. Bush..

President Bush Hosts Hanukkah Reception PODCAST VIDEO

Mrs. Laura Bush poses Monday, Dec. 15, 2008, in the White House kitchen with the rabbis who supervised the kitchen's koshering for the annual Hanukkah party. From left are Rabbi Mendel Minkowitz, Rabbi Binyomin Steinmetz and Rabbi Levi Shemtov. White House photo by Joyce N. Boghosian

President Bush Hosts Hanukkah Reception FULL STREAMING VIDEO Grand Foyer In Focus: Holidays at the White House 2008 5:30 P.M. EST PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE THE PRESIDENT: Please be seated. Welcome to the White House. You may have heard I've had a pretty eventful weekend. (Laughter.) So I slipped out Saturday night to Andrews Air Force Base, boarded Air Force One, and landed in Baghdad, Iraq, on Sunday afternoon.

It was an unbelievable experience, it really was, to stand next to the President of a democracy and hold my hand over my heart as they played the national anthem in front of one of Saddam Hussein's palaces. I then had -- (applause) -- and then I had the honor to thank our brave troops who have helped make the transformation in Iraq possible.

This morning we landed in Afghanistan. I spoke to American forces serving courageously to make sure that Afghanistan never becomes a safe haven from which the killers could launch attacks on the homeland.

And then I met with President Karzai, who is determined to help the young democracy survive. And so he said, why don't you hang around for a while? And I said, well, you don't understand. (Laughter.) I need to get back to the White House for an important event. (Laughter.) The Hanukkah reception is always one of the most special events of the season. Laura and I are pleased to be with so many friends. And we are honored to gather with leaders of the Jewish community to celebrate our final Hanukkah here in the White House.

I want to thank our Attorney General for joining us. General, I appreciate you and Susan joining us. I am proud to be here with one of America's great United States senators, Joe Lieberman -- (applause) -- his greatness made possible by his wife Hadassah, I might add. (Laughter.) And one of the young leaders of the United States Congress, Eric Cantor, and his wife Diana. (Applause.) And we're proud to be here with Kol Zimra, as well, who will perform later.

The story of Hanukkah recalls the miraculous victory of a small band of patriots against tyranny, and the oil that burned for eight nights. Through centuries of exile and persecution, Jews have lit the menorah. Each year, they behold its glow with faith in the power of God, and love for His greatest gift -- freedom.

This Hanukkah we celebrate another miraculous victory -- the 60th anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel. When President Harry Truman led the world in recognizing Israel in May of 1948, many wondered whether the small nation could possibly survive. Yet from the first days of independence, the people of Israel defied dire predictions. With determination and hard work, they turned a rocky desert into fertile soil. They built a thriving democracy, a strong economy, and one of the mightiest military forces on earth. Like the Maccabees, Israel has defended itself bravely against enemies seeking its destruction. And today, Israel is a light unto the nations -- and one of America's closest friends.

This evening, we have the great privilege of celebrating Israel's 60th anniversary and Hanukkah in a very special way. Thanks to the generosity of the Truman Library, we are fortunate to light the menorah presented to President Truman in 1951 as a symbol of friendship by Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion.

A decade after President Truman received this gift, he visited Prime Minister Ben-Gurion for one of the last times. As they parted, Ben-Gurion told the President that as a foreigner he could not judge President Truman's place in American history, but the President's courageous decision to recognize the new state of Israel gave him an immortal place in Jewish history. Those words filled the President's eyes with uncharacteristic tears. And later, Ben-Gurion would say he rarely had seen somebody so moved.

And so tonight I'm deeply moved to welcome the grandsons of these two great men -- Clifton Truman Daniel and Yariv Ben-Eliezer -- to light the Truman menorah together.

Laura and I wish all the people of Jewish faith a happy Hanukkah and many joyous Hanukkahs in the years ahead. Thank you. (Applause.)

END 5:37 P.M. EST For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 15, 2008.

Steven Chu Biography

President-elect Barack Obama has nominated Steve Chu, Director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab), to be Secretary of Energy. Chu, 60, is a Nobel laureate physicist and a Professor of Physics and Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California (UC), Berkeley.

He is also one of the nation’s foremost and outspoken advocates for scientific solutions to the twin problems of global warming and the need for carbon-neutral renewable sources of energy. He has called these problems “the greatest challenge facing science” and has rallied many of the world’s top scientists to address it.

In speeches to organizations around the globe, Chu has delivered a consistent message. “Stronger storms, shrinking glaciers and winter snowpack, prolonged droughts and rising sea levels are raising the specter of global food and water shortages. The ominous signs of climate change we see today are a warning of dire economic and social consequences for us all, but especially for the poor of the world,” Chu has said. “The path to finding solutions is to bring together the finest, most passionate minds to work on the problem in a coordinated effort, and to give these researchers the resources commensurate with the challenge.”

Since assuming the directorship of Berkeley Lab in August, 2004, Chu has put his words into action by focusing the Laboratory’s considerable scientific resources on energy security and global climate change, in particular the production of new fuels and electricity from sunlight through non-food plant materials and artificial photosynthesis. At the same time he has reinforced the Lab’s historic leadership in energy-efficient technologies and climate science.

“Steve Chu came to our lab with a vision for how our community could have an impact on the greatest scientific and technological challenges of our times,” said Deputy Berkeley Lab Director Paul Alivisatos. “Berkeley Lab has been transformed under his leadership so that we now have programs that bring together scientists from diverse disciplines to work on biofuels, soft X-ray science, solar energy, carbon management and battery technologies, just to mention a few.”

Said UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, who has known Chu for three decades since the two men worked at Bell Laboratories in the 1970s, “Steve Chu has been relentless about addressing the technical challenges of renewable energy in a deep way. We will now have an energy policy that can mean the U.S. will have a chance of obtaining energy self-sufficiency through new technology.”

Chu was instrumental in bringing to the Bay Area the Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI), a $135 million DOE-funded bioenergy research center operated by a multi-institutional partnership under the leadership of Berkeley Lab. He also played a major role in the creation of the Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI), which is funded by a $500 million grant from BP.

“Steve Chu has been an incredible visionary and true leader, particularly in the area of energy,” said Jay Keasling, who heads JBEI. “Now the country and the world will benefit from that vision and leadership."

Said Chris Somerville, who heads the EBI, “Fellow scientists see Steve Chu as a persuasive visionary able to bridge science with the private sector and government.”

Chu is internationally recognized as a proponent of increased government investment in advanced energy research, and he has been a leader in national and international studies including the influential InterAcademy Council report Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future, the National Academy’s Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, and the National Academies’ ongoing study, America's Energy Future.

UC President Mark Yudof called Chu’s nomination to lead the Energy Department an inspired choice.

“Steve is a proven leader with a passion for education and science and a talent for identifying new solutions to pressing problems,” Yudof said. “While he will be greatly missed by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the University of California, Steve will bring to Washington a distinguished record of scientific achievement and a deep understanding of the energy, environmental and national security issues at the heart of the Department of Energy’s portfolio.”

In addition to the 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics, shared with Claude Cohen-Tannoudji and William D. Phillips for developing methods to cool and trap atoms with laser light, Chu’s numerous awards include the American Physical Society’s Arthur Schawlow Prize for Laser Science, the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation’s Senior Scientist Award, a Guggenheim Fellowship, and membership in the National Academy of Sciences, the Academica Sinica, the American Philosophical Society, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the Korean Academy of Sciences and Technology.

Chu earned undergraduate degrees in mathematics and physics from the University of Rochester in 1970, a Ph.D. in physics from the University of California at Berkeley in 1976, and was a postdoctoral fellow at UC Berkeley from 1976 to 1978, when he joined ATT’s Bell Labs.

At Bell Laboratories in the fall of 1978. he was one of roughly two dozen brash, young scientists that were hired within a two year period. "We felt like the Chosen Ones, with no obligation to do anything except the research they loved best. The joy and excitement of doing science permeated the halls. The cramped labs and office cubicles forced us to interact with each other and follow each others' progress. The animated discussions were common during and after seminars and at lunch and continued on the tennis courts and at parties. The atmosphere was too electric to abandon, and I never returned to Berkeley. To this day I feel guilty about it, but I think that the faculty understood my decision and have forgiven me." he says.

Dr. Chu spent the first year at Bell writing a paper reviewing the current status of x-ray microscopy and started an experiment on energy transfer in ruby with Hyatt Gibbs and Sam McCall. He also began planning the experiment on the optical spectroscopy of positronium. Positronium, an atom made up of an electron and its anti-particle, was considered the most basic of all atoms, and a precise measurement of its energy levels was a long standing goal ever since the atom was discovered in 1950. The problem was that the atoms would annihilate into gamma rays after only 140x10-9 seconds, and it was impossible to produce enough of them at any given time. When he started the experiment, there were 12 published attempts to observe the optical fluorescence of the atom. People only publish failures if they have spent enough time and money so their funding agencies demand something in return.

He moved to Stanford University in 1987, where he was a professor of physics and applied physics, and where he received high academic honors and held a number of administrative posts before joining Berkeley Lab in 2004.

Dr. Chu's father, Ju Chin Chu, came to the United States in 1943 to continue his education at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in chemical engineering, and two years later, his mother, Ching Chen Li, joined him to study economics. A generation earlier, his mother's grandfather earned his advanced degrees in civil engineering at Cornell while his brother studied physics under Perrin at the Sorbonne before they returned to China.

when his parents married in 1945, China was in turmoil and the possibility of returning grew increasingly remote, and they decided to begin their family in the United States. Steven and his brothers were born as part of a typical nomadic academic career: his older brother was born in 1946 while his father was finishing at MIT, I was born in St. Louis on February 28, 1948 while his father taught at Washington University, and his younger brother completed the family in Queens shortly after his father took a position as a professor at the Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute.

In 1950, Steven's family settled in Garden City, New York, a bedroom community within commuting distance of Brooklyn Polytechnic. There were only two other Chinese families in this town of 25,000, but to his parents, the determining factor was the quality of the public school system. Education in the family was not merely emphasized, it was their raison d'être. Virtually all of the aunts and uncles had Ph.D.'s in science or engineering, and it was taken for granted that the next generation of Chu's were to follow the family tradition. When the dust had settled, two brothers and four cousins collected three MDs, four Ph.D.s and a law degree. dr. Chu could manage only a single advanced degree.

Dr. Chu is married to Jean Chu, an Oxford-trained physicist, and has two grown sons, Geoffrey and Michael, by a previous marriage.

Chu is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences’ committee on Alternative Models of Federal Funding of Science, and is on the Steering Committee of the Energy Security, Innovation and Sustainability Initiative of the nongovernmental Council on Competitiveness. He also serves on the Board of Trustees of the University of Rochester, the Board of Directors of the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Board of Directors of NVIDIA Corporation, the Governing Board of the Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology, and the Scientific Board of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

SOURCES:

• About The Director
• Steven Chu - Autobiography

'Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon' game provides clue to efficiency of complex networks

Caption: How the hidden metric space guides communication. If node A wants to reach node F, it checks the hidden distances between F and its two neighbors B and C. Distance CF (green dashed line) is smaller than BF (red dashed line), therefore A forwards information to C. Node C then performs similar calculations and selects its neighbor D as the next hop on the path to F. Node D is directly connected to F. The result is path ACDF shown by green edges in the observable topology. Credit: CAIDA, San Diego Supercomputer Center, UC San Diego. Usage Restrictions: None.

Results could remove bottlenecks from the Internet and biological systems As the global population continues to grow exponentially, our social connections to one another remain relatively small, as if we're all protagonists in the Kevin Bacon game inspired by "Six Degrees of Separation," a Broadway play and Hollywood feature that were popular in the 1990s. In fact, classic studies show that if we were to route a letter to an unknown person using only friends or acquaintances who we thought might know the intended recipient, it would take five or six intermediary acquaintances before the letter reaches its intended destination.

The underlying success of this phenomenon called the "small-world paradigm," discovered in the 1960s by sociologist Stanley Milgram, recently provided a source of inspiration for researchers studying the Internet as a global complex network.

The result, a study by Marián Boguñá, Dmitri Krioukov, and Kimberly Claffy, published in Nature Physics on November 16, reveals a previously unknown mathematical model called "hidden metric space" that may explain the "small-world phenomenon" and its relationship to both man-made and natural networks such as human language, as well as gene regulation or neural networks that connect neurons to organs and muscles within our bodies.

For these researchers, the concept of an underlying "hidden space" may also be relevant to their professional interests: how to remove mounting bottlenecks within the Internet that threaten the smooth passage of digital information around the globe.

"Internet experts are worried that the existing Internet routing architecture may not sustain even another decade," said Krioukov, the study's principal investigator with the Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA), based at the San Diego Supercomputer Center at the University of California, San Diego. "Routing in the existing Internet has already reached its scalability limits; black holes are appearing everywhere."

"Discovery of such a metric space hidden beneath the Internet could point toward architectural innovations that would remove this bottleneck," added Claffy, director of CAIDA and adjunct professor of computer science at UC San Diego. "Although quite prevalent in the natural world, the idea of routing using only local rather than global knowledge of network connectivity represents a revolutionary change in how to think about engineering communications networks. It's clear that the Internet's current architectural requirements are incompatible with the overwhelming amount of information that's being transmitted through this now critical global infrastructure."

According to the researchers, natural networks appear to transmit signals or messages with a high degree of efficiency, even though no single node – whether it's an individual person in a social network or a single neuron in a neural network – can visualize the global structure of the entire network.

How is this possible? By constructing a mathematical model of geometry underlying the topology of these networks, the researchers discovered that many complex networks shared a similar characteristic – their global topological structure (or shape) maximizes their communication efficiency.

"A vast majority of very different complex networks have similar shapes," said Krioukov. "They have similar shapes not just for fun, but perhaps because they all evolved toward structures and shapes that maximize efficiency according to their main common function, and that function is communication."

Take, for example, the "small-world phenomenon" described earlier. In this case, the only information people possessed to make their routing decisions was a set of descriptive attributes of the destined recipient – his or her home base and occupations. People then determined who among their contacts was "socially closest" to the target. For aficionados of the Kevin Bacon game, the goal was to connect any actor in Hollywood to Bacon through the films he made.

"The success of Milgram's experiment indicates that social distances among individuals – although they may be difficult to define mathematically – have a role in shaping the network, and may also be essential for efficient navigation," said Claffy.

Added Krioukov: "When you know the network topology, you merely know the basic layout of a network. But when you discover its underlying geometry, or hidden space, you may know how this complex network really functions."

Likewise, neural networks in the body would not function as well if they could not route specific signals to appropriate organs or muscles in the body, although no neuron has a full view of global inter-neuronal connectivity in the brain. The same can be said for the regulation of genes, which are turned on and off by regulator genes to manufacture proteins.

So, what accounts for this inherent communication efficiency of complex networks? The study suggests the existence of an underlying geometric framework that contains all the nodes of the network, shapes its topology and guides routing decisions: a "hidden metric space." Distances in this space are akin to social distances in the "small-world phenomenon." They measure similarity between people. The more similar the two persons, the closer they are in the "social space," and the more likely they are friends, connected in the acquaintance network. To route a message, a person forwards it to the friend socially closest to the message destination, as illustrated in Figure 1.

"Such routing allows networks to efficiently find intended communication targets even though they do not have a global view of the system," said Claffy.

The primary motivation for this study, according to Krioukov, was the constantly increasing size and dynamics of the Internet, leading to increasing incidences of routing bottlenecks. Discovery of the Internet's "hidden metric space" would allow messages to be forwarded to destinations based on local measurements of similarities between nodes, their positions in the "hidden space," rather than on their positions in the network, which requires global measurements of its structure.

Krioukov also suggests that reconstruction of hidden metric spaces underlying a variety of real complex networks may have other practical applications. For example, hidden spaces in social or communications networks could yield new, efficient strategies for searching for specific individuals or content. The metric spaces hidden under some biological networks also could lead to powerful tools for studying the structure of information or signal flows in these networks.

"This could be applied to cancer research, for example, whose studies rely heavily on gene regulation," he said. "Suppose you were able to find the hidden space here. One could then figure out what drives gene regulation networks and what drives them to failure. This would be an important contribution to the field." ###

The research was supported in part by DGES grant FIS2007-66485-C02-02, Generalitat de Catalunya grant No. SGR00889, the Ramón y Cajal program of the Spanish Ministry of Science, by NSF CNS-0434996 and CNS-0722070, by DHS N66001-08-C-2029 and by Cisco Systems.

Contact: Warren R. Froelich froelich@sdsc.edu 858-822-3622 University of California - San Diego

Freedom Calendar 12/13/08 - 12/20/08

December 13, 2001, “No Child Left Behind” Act to improve public education for all children passes House; signed into law by President George W. Bush. December 14, 1829, Birth of African-American Republican John Langston; served as diplomat in four Republican administrations, and in U.S. House (R-VA).

December 15, 2000, President-elect George W. Bush nominates Colin Powell as first African-American Secretary of State.

December 16, 2003, President George W. Bush signs law creating National Museum of African American History and Culture.

December 17, 2000, Republican Alberto Gonzales named as first Hispanic to serve as White House Counsel by President George W. Bush.

December 18, 1852, Birth of Republican U.S. Rep. George White (R-NC), last former slave to serve in Congress; authored bill to make lynching a federal crime.

December 19, 1820, Birth of Republican activist Mary Livermore, organizer of Women’s Suffrage Convention in 1868.

December 20, 2000, California Republican Ann Veneman nominated as first woman to be U.S. Secretary of Agriculture.

“The first Republican I knew was my father and he is still the Republican I most admire. He joined our party because the Democrats in Jim Crow Alabama of 1952 would not register him to vote. The Republicans did. My father has never forgotten that day, and neither have I."

Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State

Tags: President Bush and Freedom Calendar or Booker T. Washington and Republicans or African-Americans and Brown v. Board of Education or Ronald Reagan and Michael Steele or Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass or 40 acres and a mule or Martin Luther King and Voting Rights Act of 1965 or Dred Scott

Bush radio address 12/13/08 PODCAST TEXT TRANSCRIPT

DOWNLOAD THE MP3 FILE HERE

bush radio address 12/13/08 full audio, text transcript. President's Radio Address

Subscribe to Our Podcast feed or online podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring real audio and full text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This week, our country received good news in the fight against illegal drugs. New data show that illicit drug use amongst young people continues to decline -- and that we are making good progress in our efforts to help thousands of Americans renew their health and hope.

Substance abuse is a serious challenge for our Nation. Addiction breaks hearts, destroys families, and keeps our citizens from fulfilling their God-given potential. The drug trade also enriches our enemies, and brings crime and violence to our streets. So in 2002, I committed our Nation to an ambitious effort to cut drug use by limiting demand, reducing supply, and helping addicts get treatment.

Over the past six years, we've made great strides toward these goals. Parents, teachers, mentors, and counselors have done fantastic work to educate children about the dangers of drug abuse. Law enforcement officers have risked their lives to cut the supply of drugs on city streets. And with help from our international partners, we're pursuing drug dealers around the world, and interdicting supply before it reaches our shores. This year, the Coast Guard took possession of more than 360,000 pounds of South American cocaine -- an all-time record.

To help Americans break the chains of addiction, we've built strong partnerships with faith-based and community groups. These groups open minds and change hearts in a way no government bureaucracy can -- so my Administration has supported their life-changing work. Through our Access to Recovery program, addicts receive vouchers they can redeem at treatment centers of their choice -- including faith-based centers. So far, this program has helped more than 260,000 addicts along the path toward clean lives.

Taken together, our efforts to reduce demand, cut supply, and help people break the chains of addiction are yielding measurable results. Over the past seven years, marijuana use by young people has dropped by 25 percent. Methamphetamine use by young people is down by 50 percent. And the use of cocaine, hallucinogens, steroids, and alcohol by America's youth are all on the decline. Overall, illegal drug use by Americans is down by 25 percent -- meaning we have helped approximately 900,000 young people stay clean.

These statistics reflect successful government policies. They also represent the courage and compassion of Americans who are determined to help their fellow citizens win their struggle against drugs. On Thursday, I met with some of these people at the White House, and I am inspired by their stories.

I was especially interested in a young man named Josh. At age 19, Josh had never touched drugs or alcohol. He had a promising life and career ahead of him. Yet after a car accident left him injured and unable to work, Josh started abusing alcohol and cocaine. He put his marriage and career in jeopardy. Eight different treatment programs failed to turn his life around -- but the intervention of his grandmother, the support of his wife, and the loving influence of God did. Today, this young man is free of drugs. He's a caring husband and father. And Josh Hamilton of the Texas Rangers is one of the best players in Major League Baseball. More importantly, he and his wife Katie make time to share their blessings. Through their ministry, they're helping other Americans avoid the suffering their family endured.

Josh Hamilton shows that the devastation of drug addiction can happen to anyone -- but that with faith and determination, anyone can turn a life around. So today I ask every American with a drug or alcohol problem to seek treatment -- because your life is precious to the people who love you, our Nation needs your contributions, and there is a more hopeful future ahead. I ask all Americans to reach out to your neighbors in need -- and do your part to help our Nation win the fight against illegal drugs. Thank you for listening. # # #

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 13, 2008

Tags: President Bush and White House radio address

Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación 12/13/08

Descargar el archivo MP3 aquí

forre el audio de la dirección de radio 12/13/08 por completo, transcripción del texto. (nota de los redactores: ninguna lengua española mp3 lanzó esta semana, apesadumbrada) PODCAST

Suscribir a nuestro canal de Podcast de Odeo o del podnova y recibir la dirección de radio presidencial semanal en inglés y español con informes selectos del departamento del estado. Ofreciendo transcripciones audio y con texto completo verdaderas, más fuentes contentas agregaron a menudo así que la estancia templó.

Buenos Días.

Esta semana nuestro país recibió buenas noticias en cuanto a la lucha contra drogas ilegales. Nuevos datos indican que el uso de drogas ilícitas entre jóvenes continúa disminuyendo – y que estamos logrando buen progreso en nuestros esfuerzos para ayudar a miles de estadounidenses a renovar su salud y su esperanza.

El abuso de sustancias es un desafío serio para nuestra Nación. La adicción rompe corazones, destruye familias, y no deja que nuestros ciudadanos realicen el potencial que Dios otorga a cada persona. El narcotráfico también enriquece a nuestros enemigos y trae crimen y violencia a nuestras calles. Por lo tanto, en 2002 yo comprometí a nuestra Nación en un esfuerzo ambicioso para reducir el uso de drogas limitando la demanda… reduciendo la oferta… y ayudando a los adictos a recibir tratamiento.

Durante los últimos seis años, hemos logrado grandes progresos hacia estas metas. Padres, maestros, mentores y consejeros han desarrollado una labor extraordinaria para educar a los niños sobre los peligros del abuso de drogas. Las autoridades del orden público han arriesgado sus vidas para reducir la oferta de drogas en las calles de nuestras ciudades. Y con la ayuda de nuestros socios internacionales, estamos persiguiendo a narcotraficantes alrededor del mundo, e interceptando su oferta antes de que entre a nuestro territorio. Este año, las Guardacostas capturaron más de 360,000 libras de cocaína sudamericana – un nuevo récord.

Para ayudar a los estadounidenses a romper las cadenas de la adicción, hemos creado fuertes asociaciones con grupos basados en la fe y comunitarios. Estos grupos abren las mentes y cambian los corazones en una forma que no puede hacerlo ninguna burocracia gubernamental – por lo cual mi Administración ha apoyado su trabajo que cambia vidas. A través de nuestro programa Acceso a la Recuperación, los adictos pueden recibir cupones para usar en centros de tratamiento de su elección – incluyendo centros basados en la fe. Hasta el momento, este programa ha ayudado a 260,000 adictos en el camino hacia vidas más sanas.

Tomados en su conjunto, nuestros esfuerzos para reducir la demanda, eliminar la oferta y ayudar a las personas a romper las cadenas de la adicción están rindiendo resultados que se pueden medir. En los últimos siete años, el uso de la marihuana entre jóvenes ha disminuido en un 25 por ciento. El uso de metamfetamina entre jóvenes ha disminuido en un 50 por ciento. Y el uso de cocaína, alucinógenos, esteroides y alcohol entre jóvenes estadounidenses ha bajado en un 25 por ciento – lo que significa que hemos ayudado a aproximadamente 900,000 jóvenes a mantenerse libre de drogas.

Estas estadísticas reflejan políticas gubernamentales exitosas. También representan el valor y la compasión de estadounidenses que están comprometidos a ayudar a sus conciudadanos a ganar su lucha contra las drogas. El jueves me reuní con algunas de estas personas en la Casa Blanca – y estoy inspirado por sus historias.

Me interesó en especial un joven llamado Josh. A los 19 años de edad, Josh nunca había tocado drogas ni alcohol. Tenía una vida y carrera prometedoras por delante. Sin embargo, después que un accidente de automóvil lo dejó lesionado y sin poder trabajar, Josh comenzó a abusar el alcohol y la cocaína. Puso en peligro su matrimonio y su carrera. Ocho programas de tratamiento distintos no lograron darle vuelta a su vida – pero la intervención de su abuela, el apoyo de su esposa, y la influencia bondadosa de Dios si lo lograron. Hoy en día, este joven está libre de drogas. Es un esposo y padre afectuoso. Y Josh Hamilton de los Texas Rangers es uno de los mejores jugadores en el béisbol de las grandes ligas. De mayor importancia, él y su esposa Katie toman tiempo para compartir sus bendiciones. A través de su ministerio, están ayudando a otros estadounidenses a evitar el sufrimiento que su familia soportó.

Josh Hamilton muestra que la devastación de la adicción a las drogas le puede pasar a cualquiera – pero que con fe y determinación, cualquiera puede darle la vuelta a su vida. Por lo tanto, hoy le pido a todo estadounidense que tenga un problema de drogas o de alcohol que busque tratamiento – porque su vida es preciosa para las personas que lo aman… nuestra Nación necesita sus contribuciones… y hay un futuro de mayor esperanza por delante. Les pido a todos los estadounidenses que les ofrezcan una mano a sus vecinos que necesiten ayuda – y que pongan de su parte para ayudar a nuestra Nación a ganar la lucha contra las drogas ilegales.

Gracias por escuchar.

Para su publicación inmediata Oficina del Secretario de Prensa 13 de diciembre de 2008

Etiquetas De Technorati: Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación, y Presidente Bush

President Bush Delivers Commencement Address at Texas A&M VIDEO PODCAST

President George W. Bush smiles with his parents, former President George H.W. Bush, left, and former first lady Barbara Bush following his commencement address at Texas A&M University's winter convocation Friday, Dec. 12, 2008, in College Station, Texas. White House photo by Eric Draper.

President Bush Delivers Commencement Address at Texas A&M FULL STREAMING VIDEO Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 10:36 A.M. CST. PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Howdy! AUDIENCE: Howdy!

THE PRESIDENT: I am thrilled to be back in Aggieland. (Applause.) And it's always an honor to be introduced by the President of the United States -- especially when he's your Dad. And how about Mom? Mom, I've been meaning to say this publicly for a long time -- thanks, thanks for the gray hair. (Laughter.)

I congratulate the graduates of the Fighting Texas Aggie Classes of 2008 -- (applause) -- class of 2007 -- (applause) -- the class of 2006 -- I'd better stop. (Laughter.) Let's just say that I hope there's no one left from when I spoke to the commencement in 1998. (Laughter.) If so, I hope you're walking out of here with a Ph.D. (Laughter.)

I am grateful to the faculty and staff of Texas A&M for their devotion to learning and their example of scholarship. I appreciate your outstanding President, Dr. Elsa Murano. And I am glad to be with -- there you go. (Applause.) And I am glad to travel from Washington today with three fine Aggies representing Texas in the United States Congress -- Congressmen Chet Edwards, Joe Barton, and Jeb Hensarling. (Applause.)

I am pleased to see so many of your families and loved ones here today. While you bled maroon, they bled a lot of green. (Laughter.) So please join me in thanking all those whose support made it possible for you to reach this proud day. (Applause.)

There is one person who wishes he could be here today -- and that's your former President, and America's Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates. (Applause.) You know, he's got an excused absence. It's not like he's over at the Dixie Chicken. (Laughter.) He's traveling to the Middle East, consulting with our generals, and showing his support for the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. (Applause.)

When I asked Bob to be the Secretary of Defense, it was clear how much he loved Texas A&M. After all, he refused to come to Washington until after he attended the winter commencement. And I was even more impressed when he insisted on standing during the Cabinet meetings -- (laughter) -- claiming he was the "12th Man." (Laughter.) One day, he explained it all. He said: "Mr. President, I'm red ass." (Applause.)

I'll say this for A&M -- you've got some mighty fine traditions. (Applause.) Back in my day, I think I would have enjoyed dunking my ring. (Applause.) I would have loved to have taken Laura to "midnight yell." (Applause.) I especially like the traditions around Reveille. Anytime she barks during a class lecture, everyone in the room is dismissed. (Applause.) I wish she had been there for some of those press conferences. (Laughter and applause.)

This campus is home to solemn rituals that demonstrate the strength of your bonds. In playing of Silver Taps to honor fallen classmates, in the reunion of students and alumni to read the roll call at Muster, and in wearing of your timeless rings, you affirm a powerful truth: Once an Aggie, always an Aggie. (Applause.)

Traditions like these are central to the A&M experience. And so is academic excellence, and all of you will benefit from your rigorous courses of study. I suspect you'll also find that some of your most important learning took place outside the classroom -- in the friendships you formed, perspective you gained, and the things you discovered about yourselves. When you leave this campus, you will be well prepared for any endeavor you choose. To those of you who have jobs lined up, I -- congratulations. To those not exactly sure what comes next -- I know how you feel. (Laughter and applause.)

As our days in the White House wind down, we're going through a series of "lasts." I pardoned my last Thanksgiving turkey. Laura decorated for her last Christmas in the White House. And Barney bit his last reporter. (Laughter.) Or at least that's what we hope. (Laughter.)

This is also my last commencement address as President. (Applause.) And it is fitting that it takes place here in Texas, where I have been so blessed over the years. I was raised here by wonderful parents, surrounded by brothers and sisters whose love still sustains me. And Texas is where I went to a backyard barbeque and met a beautiful teacher named Laura Welch. Texas is where our girls were born and our lifelong friends live. And next month, when our time in Washington is done, Texas is where we're coming home. (Applause.)

These days, I'm asked a lot about my time as President. Some days have been happy, some days not so happy -- every day joyous. It's been a tremendous privilege. I have traveled across our nation, and to 74 countries around the world. I have slept in Buckingham Palace; I have feasted in the desert of Abu Dhabi; I've watched the sunrise in Jerusalem. I have spoken to campaign rallies in packed stadiums, and to hundreds of thousands in Romania's Revolution Square. I've taken Marine One into America's biggest cities, and visited many of our smallest towns. Through it all, nothing has inspired me more than the character of the American people -- the acts of courage and service that sustain our free society, and make this the greatest nation on Earth. (Applause.)

Courage and service are cherished here at A&M, and they are values that I hope will guide you for the years to come. So this morning, I thought I would share a few of the most powerful examples of courage and service that I have witnessed over the past eight years.

No act of courage or service is more impressive than volunteering for the United States military. Eight years ago, a brave 17-year-old named Christian Bagge made that noble choice when he stepped forward to join the Oregon National Guard. In 2005, Christian's unit was on patrol in Iraq when his Humvee hit a roadside bomb. He lost both his legs, and he thought he would lose his life. But with determination and superb medical care, this good man survived.

I met him at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas. He told me he used to be a runner and he planned to run again. I was impressed by his courage, but it was hard to imagine a man with such severe injuries ever being able to run. I said to him offhandedly, you know, when you're ready to run just call me, I'll be glad to run with you -- and moved on.

Well, then one day, a phone call came to the Oval Office. It was Christian. He said, "I'm ready to take you up on your offer, Mr. President." Just five months after I'd seen him in the hospital, he showed up at the White House with legs made of carbon fiber -- and a spirit stronger than steel. Together, we took a lap around the South Lawn. I'll admit, he left his Commander-In-Chief in the dust. (Laughter.) And he left me with great admiration for his unshakable determination, his upbeat spirit, and his inspiring example for all Americans. (Applause.)

People like Christian show the true strength of our military -- and so do the families who support them. Last year in Reno, Nevada, I met a orthopedic surgeon named Bill Krissoff. His son Nathan, a Marine, had given his life in Iraq. Dr. Krissoff told me he wanted to join the Navy Medical Corps in Nathan's honor. I looked at this remarkable man, I said: "How old are you?" He said he was 60 years old. He needed a special waiver to qualify for the Navy. I was thinking I'm 61, so he didn't sound all that old. (Laughter.) I asked his wife what she thought of the whole thing, and she said she supported his decision. So I went back to Washington -- and surprisingly enough, a few days later the waiver came through.

Since then, Dr. Krissoff has undergone extensive training in battlefield medicine. And soon he will deploy to Iraq, where he'll help save the wounded, uphold the legacy of his fallen son, and inspire the United States of America. (Applause.)

Petty Officer Greg Guillory is also in the Navy. But that is not the only way he serves. Greg lost his mother in a car accident at a young age, and his stepmother suffered from a serious drug addiction. Greg earned a four-year scholarship to play college football -- he was a high school player here in the state of Texas. But he turned down that scholarship so he could stay home to help his family confront its problems. Eventually, he decided to join the Navy, where he found a strong and supportive environment.

While stationed in San Diego, Greg met his wife Shonda, who had also endured a painful childhood. Together, they resolved to help children trapped in difficult circumstances, and made the selfless and compassionate decision to become foster parents. They spent a year caring for a 17-year-old who been abused. Then they took in a 14-year-old who had been beaten, then a baby born with drugs in her system, and then a three-year-old whose mother was in jail. Today they are caring for two children, a brother and sister, as well as the baby girl Shonda delivered last month.

And all the while, Greg has been carrying out his duties in uniform. He is stationed at Camp David, Maryland -- and this generous man who has given so much to others feels so grateful himself. During a moving testimony at the Camp David chapel that I was fortunate enough to witness this past Thanksgiving, he said: "I am thankful that God continues to bless me so I can be a blessing for children in need."

America is blessed to have citizens like Greg and Shonda, whose hearts are big enough to share the greatest gift of all -- the gift of love. (Applause.)

Kendrick Kennedy shared that gift, too, after Hurricane Katrina struck his hometown of Biloxi, Mississippi. Even though his own house had been damaged, Kendrick put others first -- helping family members find shelter, and cleaning up debris in neighbors' yards. There's another piece of the story: Kendrick is blind. A few years before the storm, he lost his sight -- and his job. But he refused to let that hold him back. He enrolled at Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College. I met him there when I spoke at his commencement. He went on to the University of Southern Mississippi, where he became the first blind student to graduate summa cum laude. Now he's in law school in Ole Miss. And this good man has set a high goal -- to serve our country as a justice on the Supreme Court. (Applause.)

Other Americans show courage by summoning the hidden strength to overcome their weaknesses. Four years ago, I met Letitia Chavez-Paulette. She had been addicted to drugs; she served time for her mistakes. While in prison, she joined a faith-based program called Celebrate Recovery, and to help turn her life around. When she was released, Letitia was determined to support other women returning to society. So she started a transitional home called "A Peaceful Habitation" -- a name taken from the Book of Isaiah. Here's what Letitia said: "God's grace has kept me going. His love has kept me strong. And my faith is a gift that is helping me help others."

In these stories, we see the courage and service that defined America at its best. And that same spirit has long defined Texas A&M. It's the spirit of General Earl Rudder, who helped lead the D-Day invasion and served more than a decade as A&M's president. It is the spirit of the Corps of Cadet, which includes nearly 1,800 Aggies. It is the spirit of your ROTC program, which routinely commissions more officers than any school outside the service academies. It's the spirit of the 21 Aggies who've given their lives to keep America safe since September the 11th, 2001 -- a sacrifice that will be honored forever by your "Freedom from Terrorism" memorial.

That same spirit is visible on this campus in many ways beyond the military. A&M is home to "The Big Event" -- the largest student-run community service project in the nation. After Hurricane Ike hit the Texas coast, you welcomed more than 1,600 "Sea Aggies" from A&M's Galveston campus to College Station. And in countless other acts of volunteerism and charity, you have made Texas A&M's name synonymous with service.

On your last day as A&M students, my call to you is to continue this spirit long after you leave the campus. There are so many needs to be met, and so many ways you can help -- from mentoring a child to becoming a teacher, to volunteering to feed the hungry or heal the sick overseas. If you hear the call to service in the military or government, answer it. If you enter the private sector, be proud of contributing to our prosperity -- and give back to your communities. Wherever life leads you, pursue the path of service -- and you will find fulfillment beyond measure.

As you embark on this journey, let me leave you with a few last pieces of advice. First, listen to your mother. (Laughter and applause.) As you can see, Mom is out of the hospital and everything is back to normal. After all, she's still telling me what to do. (Laughter.)

Second, develop a set of principles to live by -- convictions and ideals to guide your course. There will be times when people tell you a different way is more accepted or popular. Remember that popularity is as fleeting as the Texas wind. Character and conscience are as sturdy as the oaks on this campus. If you go home at night, look in the mirror and be satisfied that you have done what is right, you will pass the only test that matters. (Applause.)

And finally, be on the lookout for role models -- people whose conduct you admire and whose paths you can follow. With that in mind, I have one last example of courage and service. It's a story of a young man who left comfort behind to answer his nation's call, became the youngest pilot in the Navy, and nearly gave his life in World War II. When he came back home, he devoted his career to public service, and proved that success in politics can be accomplished with decency and grace. He reached the pinnacle in government, but he defines his life by other roles -- a father who gave unconditional love, a grandfather devoted to his grandchildren, and a beloved husband of the sweetheart he married a lifetime ago. Some of you will leave A&M with a degree that carries this good man's name -- George Bush. I have been blessed and honored to have carried it for 62 years. (Applause.)

I want to thank you. I want to thank you for the opportunity to share this special day with you. I congratulate you. When I leave office next month, I will depart confident in the future of our country, because I have faith in each of you. I will depart uplifted by the many acts of courage and service that I have witnessed these past eight years. I will depart grateful for the outpouring of support and prayers that have strengthened Laura and me. And I will depart ready to come home to the people I have missed and the place I love -- the state of Texas. (Applause.)

And so, after all this, there is only one thing left to say: Gig'em Aggies! (Applause.) Congratulations, and may God bless you. (Applause.)

END 10:29 A.M. CST

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 12, 2008

U.S. Department of State Preventing Future Terrorist Attacks in Pakistan VIDEO

Daily Press Briefing Sean McCormack, Spokesman Washington, DC December 11, 2008

MR. MCCORMACK:
Good morning, everybody. Sorry for being a little bit late. I don’t have anything to start with. We’ll get right to your questions. Sure.

QUESTION: Can you explain exactly what was – what this document means?

MR. MCCORMACK: I can’t read it. Sorry.

QUESTION: This would be the Chairman’s statement of the Six-Party Talks.

MR. MCCORMACK: Okay, all right. Sure, let me --

QUESTION: Because it doesn't really --

MR. MCCORMACK: It doesn't address the issue at hand. Right. Let me try to – I’m prepared to try to do that. I’ll let you be the judge as to how precise my explanation is.

Chris is on his way back. And I guess the best way to put this is that, you know, from our point of view, and I think this is a shared point of view certainly among the five parties, North Korea perhaps being the exception, but the objective of this Six-Party round was to formalize the understandings that the U.S. and North Korea had previously reached verification, just to “Six-Party-ize” this so everybody – so everybody could initial it, everybody could put all of these understandings down on paper.

Just to rewind the tape a little bit, in terms – with our – in our negotiations with the North Koreans, we had agreed upon many things on pieces – on a piece of paper that both sides could initial, if you will. Some of the understandings that we reached were part of an oral understanding that we took very precise and careful notes on. In subsequent conversations with other members of the Six-Party Talks, they affirmed that this was their understanding of our conversation with the North Koreans based on their separate interactions with the North Koreans.

So the whole – the idea was to put all of this on a piece of paper so that everybody could understand what was – what had been agreed to in the verification discussions. And part of this – two important points in this were that the reference to scientific – the scientific procedures meant sampling. I know that that is something that there’s been a lot of discussion about. And it also covered not just plutonium, but HEU and proliferation activities. So the scope of the agreement covered all three of those areas, and that one of the agreed upon verification members – one of the agreed upon verification measures was sampling.

So that’s to kind of bring you up to the present date. The draft – and this is an interesting point. The draft that North Korea said it could not sign onto at this round of the Six-Party Talks was a Chinese draft. We had signed onto the draft, so what – North Korea wasn’t – you know, wasn’t rejecting – rejecting is not the right word – didn’t want to sign onto an American draft. This was a Chinese draft. And I think it’s safe to say that all the other members of the Six-Party Talks supported this draft. So in that sense, North Korea, on this question, is isolated.

And where we stand now is that North Korea said it could not, at that meeting, accept the draft, it could not initial the draft. All the parties said okay, let’s – let’s adjourn the meeting, go back to capitals, think about it, and we’ll keep working this process. But this is, I think, an indication – it’s a public indication of how central to this process we view verification. Verification is absolutely essential to this process. Quite frankly, it is not going to be able to move forward without agreement on a verification protocol. So we will – in terms of our obligations, I don’t see those moving forward until we have an agreement on this verification protocol.

QUESTION: So I’m --

MR. MCCORMACK: So is that precise enough?

QUESTION: Well, I mean, maybe. But why do you make such a big deal out of the fact that it was a Chinese draft and not – I mean, basically, didn’t the Chinese – didn’t the Chinese draft incorporate or include all of the things that you had a – that you just got verbal understandings with?

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah. Yes.

QUESTION: So what difference does it make whether it’s a --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, because very often – very often, this gets played out in public and the media as a U.S.-North Korea issue. And I make the point only to say that this is not a U.S.-North Korea issue; this is a North Korea-all the rest of the members of the Six-Party Talks issue. And in fact, this was a Chinese draft that --

QUESTION: Is it fair to say, though, then that the – or that the initial understandings that Chris thought he had with the North Koreans was a U.S.-North Korean?

MR. MCCORMACK: On behalf – no, but we were negotiating on behalf of the other parties. It was – these were understandings that we arrived at --

QUESTION: It doesn't appear that it worked very well if you --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think it worked well for five of the six parties, and we’ll see whether or not it works for the last of the six parties. Now --

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. MCCORMACK: It is, admittedly, but – admittedly. But as I said, this process is not going to move forward beyond this point without a verification protocol being agreed upon.

QUESTION: Sean, did you jump the gun then, taking them off the state sponsors --

MR. MCCORMACK: No, and I knew that this was going to come up.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. MCCORMACK: No, it’s – because that was – that was an action, again, as I said yesterday, that was based on the law and the facts. That’s an irreducible condition. You can’t get around that. They met the criteria.

As I said, this is a process that is action-for-action, and the North Koreans had made considerable progress on disablement and they had – and they also agreed with us on a verification protocol. So – and again, I don’t want to go back to tracing – you know, connecting each action for each action going back to the beginning of this process, but fair to say, that’s where we were up until this meeting. And going forward, the United States is – and I think it’s to say perhaps others – not going to move forward with further obligations absent a verification protocol.

QUESTION: Are you going to rethink your policy toward North Korea?

MR. MCCORMACK: No. Again, we’ll see, you know, the – the place where we find ourselves now is that this meeting has been adjourned. It did not achieve the goal of an agreed among the six verification protocol. We have agreement among five. We’ll see on the sixth. They are going to back to their capitals. They are going to think about it, consider the proposition. And we’ll see – we’ll see what that yields.

All of that said, this – you know, this mechanism will still be, in that intervening time – and I can’t tell you how long that intervening time will be – will remain a vital consultative coordination mechanism for the United States as well as the other four parties.

QUESTION: So is the negotiation over for the --

MR. MCCORMACK: No.

QUESTION: -- Bush Administration?

MR. MCCORMACK: No. I – well, in terms of further action in the Six-Party mechanism, we’ll see what the North Korean response is going to be. And I want to emphasize that the idea here is that there will continue to be work, there will continue to be action, in terms of consultation. And certainly, we, as well as others – the Chinese, I would expect – will encourage North Korea to accept the common understanding of the other five and to move this process forward.

QUESTION: Do you think it was a mistake to come to an oral understanding on this issue, you know, bilaterally with the U.S. and North Korea?

MR. MCCORMACK: No, because we got a commitment. And we have very, very precise notes about those commitments, and we committed those to paper and also in the form of a memorandum, a memorandum for the record, if you will. So we know what was committed to during those discussions. And it was very, very useful to be able to bring that written record. And again, others have independently confirmed the substance of those conversations between the United States and North Korea. So it was very useful to have that down on paper. Now, we’ll see if North Korea – we’ll see if North Korea is willing to take the next step and to formalize that among the six.

QUESTION: But it did give North Korea a way out. I mean, if it wasn’t in writing and it was just an oral understanding, it did give them a way to sort of not agree to this.

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, again, the process isn’t moving forward either way. So we have actually advanced the ball where they have this – they have reached an understanding with us based on behalf of the other parties. We will see if they will take that next step now to formalize it on paper among the six.

QUESTION: So your failure to get them to agree in this is actually progress; is that what you’re saying?

MR. MCCORMACK: No, we did get them to agree.

QUESTION: But they haven’t.

MR. MCCORMACK: Again – and again --

QUESTION: When you say that others have independently verified, how is that possible when they --

MR. MCCORMACK: In conversations with the North Koreans. Look, there is nothing easy --

QUESTION: So the North Koreans have made these verbal commitments to other members of the Six Parties?

MR. MCCORMACK: There was an understanding that was affirmed verbally with the Chinese that this was the understanding. And again, this is a Chinese draft of the verification – verification protocols, and we’ll see if this process move forward. And you know, we have been rock solid on the issue of verification, saying this is central to this process and it will not move forward without a verification protocol. And I’ll add, just again editorially, that this is not – in this verification protocol, this is not anything extraordinary. This is common practice in these kinds of agreement.

Now, perhaps it is not common practice with North Korea. We understand that – we understand the parties – the party with whom we are negotiating. We’ll see if they’ll take this next step. If not, then this process, at this point, won’t move forward. It will still remain vital in terms of a mechanism to achieve denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and we still believe that we can make progress in the remaining time we have in this Administration. We’ll see, though. That will be up to North Korea.

QUESTION: Okay. There’s no date set for the next meeting at the envoys level --

MR. MCCORMACK: Correct.

QUESTION: -- but there is a date set for this working group on the (inaudible) the Northeast Asia Security Initiative, and that date is set for February in Moscow. Are you confident that the next administration – how can you commit the next administration to this?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, again, they will make their own decisions. We have always said that we will act in what we believe to be the best interests of the United States in foreign policy. But very clearly, you know, each administration is going to have – the new administration is going to have to make its own decisions about which meetings it attends and doesn't attend based on its policy orientation. I mean, for example, there are NATO meetings scheduled which we say, yes, we’re sure the next administration will be there, but again, I guess technically --

QUESTION: That’s not --

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, technically --

QUESTION: But NATO is not an initiative of --

MR. MCCORMACK: I know. I exaggerate to make a point, Matt. The – you know, everybody knows they’re going to show up. But again, they’re going to have to make their own decisions about --

QUESTION: Well, yeah. But the incoming administration, or at least during the campaign, and its officials were quite unhappy with the way that the Bush Administration dealt with North Korea. Is there – and do you have any indication from them that they’re prepared – that they’re willing to carry on and that they’ll go ahead and --

MR. MCCORMACK: I will let them speak for themselves.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Do you feel sort of double-crossed by the North Koreans? I mean, they promised you one thing early and now they’re not committing themselves? I mean, do you feel as if they’re just dumping you and hoping for the next – a better deal with the next administration?

MR. MCCORMACK: Do we feel jilted?

QUESTION: Do you feel jilted? Yeah.

MR. MCCORMACK: No. Look, we understand with whom we are negotiating. I don’t think that there are any illusions about that. And I don’t think that there has been anything easy about this process, but it has yielded results through difficult and less difficult times. And we’ll see. This is one of those times where we’ll see if the process moves forward. We’ve had – we’ve gone through a number of these different way points, and to date it has moved forward, albeit not at the pace that we or others would have hoped. Nonetheless, it has moved forward. And evidence of that is the state of the disablement of Yongbyon, something that has never before been achieved – not even close – as well as the kinds of declarations that the North Koreans have made. Now, we’ve said we don’t take those on face value, they have to be verified, which brings us to the point where we are right now. And we’ll see if we can get to the point of an agreed upon “Six-Party-ized” verification protocol.

QUESTION: What about those who’ve been very critical of you, like John Bolton, for example? I mean, he feels like you gave them the keys to the candy store and just said, you know, go in and take whatever you like.

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, the First Amendment is alive and well. You know, freedom of speech in this country – and he was entitled to his opinion. We don’t agree with him. We think that’s wrong. We think that we have taken a sober-minded approach to this that is in the best interest of America’s national security and foreign policy. Some will disagree with that, and we’ll see what the process yields. But I – you know, you’ve heard, you know, me, you’ve heard the Secretary, you’ve heard the President of the United States talk about the fact that we believe that this is the right policy. And we have been very careful in implementing the policy. It has been action-for-action. And you see now we have gotten to the point where we need to see action from North Korea; otherwise, the process will not move forward.

QUESTION: But you took them off the list because you had the promise, well, things are moving along, but you also had the promise that they were going to meet their obligations, and they’ve not met them. So are you going to just (inaudible)?

MR. MCCORMACK: And the process --

QUESTION: I know you said earlier that you wouldn't, but could you slap them back on the list?

MR. MCCORMACK: Again, the law dictates how you get on the list; it dictates how you get off the list. If they meet the criteria for getting back on the list, one supposes they could be put back on the list. But I’m not aware that there is any indication that they have met the criteria.

QUESTION: But are you looking at that?

MR. MCCORMACK: You look at it always with every country around the – I guess, supposedly, every country around the world, technically speaking. But I’m not trying to indicate – indicate to you any particular action on our point.

QUESTION: What happens to the oil shipments? Will those be suspended?

MR. MCCORMACK: The what? (Inaudible.) Well, we – the United States – and I – as I said, I suspect others, have obligations, and this is an action-for-action negotiation. We have yet to see action on the verification protocol from North Korea. So I suspect that that would be – anything that we might do would be pending North Korea taking the steps that they have obliged themselves to make.

QUESTION: So they’re suspended for now?

QUESTION: Who’s next?

MR. MCCORMACK: I would suspect – I – you – I don’t think you’re going to see much action from other parties until North Korea acts.

QUESTION: Who is next to deliver fuel to them?

MR. MCCORMACK: I’ll check for you. I don’t know.

QUESTION: Would you recommend that that party not go ahead and deliver fuel?

MR. MCCORMACK: Again, I think the ball is in North Korea’s court in terms of what needs to be done next.

QUESTION: Just one more. They met for four days.

MR. MCCORMACK: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: The main thing that you – that everyone – or that this meeting – that these meetings were supposed to produce was this verification protocol.

MR. MCCORMACK: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: And unless I have a bad copy of this statement, the word “verification” appears once.

MR. MCCORMACK: Uh-huh. Are you saying that (inaudible)?

QUESTION: And it’s – and it says – verification comes out as part of the agenda items, and it’s never mentioned again.

MR. MCCORMACK: Are you saying, Matt, that a multilateral diplomatic statement is opaque?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. MCCORMACK: Color me shocked. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: This seems --

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah. Look, I think I’ve given a pretty clear summation.

QUESTION: All right. This is the second time in the -- a couple of months where things that were oral agreements in international affairs have floundered, have fallen apart, the first being the Russia-Georgia ceasefire where everything was allegedly based on the notes that the French took when in their meeting, and now you have this debacle.

MR. MCCORMACK: Debacle?

QUESTION: Yes. Is there any more given – any thought to the idea that maybe, you know, one side’s notes are really not the best way to, you know, approach – to solve problems, that you really need to get things on writing – in writing first?

MR. MCCORMACK: Which is what we were doing in Beijing.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Just one more. You have five weeks, I think -- left till January 20th. Do you expect any (inaudible)?

MR. MCCORMACK: Forty days.

QUESTION: Oh, is it?

MR. MCCORMACK: Forty days.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: But who’s counting?

MR. MCCORMACK: Right. But who’s counting? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Looking at the calendar. Do you expect any greater U.S. push with North Korea bilaterally to try to bring them around one more time? Is that worth it?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I – I suspect that, you know, all the members of the – albeit the five members – will continue to work with North Korea, consult with North Korea. But the protocol is the protocol, and we would urge them to see it as in their interest to agree to it.

QUESTION: Could you put it in context? Is that a serious breakdown in this long process of talks? I don’t think you agreed with Matt’s description, but how would you characterize the --

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: You don’t --

MR. MCCORMACK: No, I wouldn’t agree with that characterization. You know, I don’t know. I can’t put a bumper sticker on it. It’s not going to move forward until they agree to the verification protocol.

Anything else on North Korea? All right, let’s --

QUESTION: Okay. So the UN banning the Jamaat ul-Dawa yesterday evening, can you get a reaction to that, one? And two --

MR. MCCORMACK: Is this the 1267 committee?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.

QUESTION: And does the U.S. plan to do something similar for the – do you have (inaudible)?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, clearly, we support the action of the committee. In terms of the United States, you know, we don’t – we don’t foreshadow any particular move that we might take. You know, our people who have responsibility for looking at ways to ensure that terrorist groups can’t – don’t have access to the kind of funding or resources that they need to operate, that’s an ongoing 24/7 operation. And we make announcements post facto, and the reason for that is you don’t want to have asset flight. That applies to all of those kinds of operations.

Yeah.

QUESTION: The Indian Foreign Minister this – has just recently said that Pakistan is not doing enough, or more needs to be done. Is that also what the U.S. believes?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we think that Pakistan has taken some important steps. As I said yesterday, it’s a day-by-day kind of thing. This is – and not just Pakistan; countries around the world where there’s an issue with violent extremists or terrorists. Our emphasis has been, in terms of the steps Pakistan has already taken, let’s make sure that everything is done to prevent any future terrorist attacks. And ultimately, people responsible have to be brought to justice, and again – but we’ll continue to work with both parties on this.

QUESTION: Just about an hour ago, Pakistan said that following the UN ban, it will be banning the Jamaat ul-Dawa. According to U.S. intelligence, is that something you believe will happen? After the parliament attack, it said it would ban the Lashkar e-Tayyiba, and that seemed to have just petered out with time.

MR. MCCORMACK: We’ll – again, we’ll let the Pakistani Government speak to their own actions. But certainly, you know, I believe that – I have seen news reports that they have made that announcement, and certainly, that would be a positive step.

Yeah, Sue.

QUESTION: The Secretary’s been quite outspoken about President Mugabe, and – well, what are you planning next week at the UN in terms of trying to take action against Mugabe and to force him out?

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah. We’ll put out a media note for you either today or tomorrow just formally announcing – she’ll be up at the UN for a variety of different activities, and we’ll try to describe those in more detail either Friday or Monday for you. I expect Zimbabwe will be a point of discussion. Certainly, she’ll be seeing many of her colleagues on the Security Council as well as many of her counterparts who will be coming to New York as well to address a variety of different issues, whether that’s piracy or whether that’s Zimbabwe.

We have made quite clear where we stand, and we think it is time for all countries who have what I refer to as unused leverage to use that leverage. The time has come for Robert Mugabe to go. His continuance in that position is a hindrance to Zimbabwe being able to get itself – pull itself out of this deep crisis in which it finds itself, which is just sad to watch. And the countries in the region have a special responsibility in that regard. There is a humanitarian crisis that is only deepening, and we’re trying to respond to that. And I think in a couple of minutes, you will – well, once we’re done here, our Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Ambassador McGee, will be out here along with USAID Administrator Fore to give you a little sense for not only the situation on the ground, but how the United States is responding to it.

The last count I had -- and perhaps Administrator Fore has an update for you -- just a couple days ago, we had 14,000 cases of cholera in Zimbabwe with the prediction that that was – that number was going to -- only going to grow.

QUESTION: You say that the countries in the region have a special responsibility.

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.

QUESTION: That would be particularly South Africa. So what are you doing --

MR. MCCORMACK: As well as others, as well as others. Namibia --

QUESTION: Yeah, Botswana, Zambia, Namibia. So --

MR. MCCORMACK: Namibia, Angola.

QUESTION: So what – what are you doing specifically to try and get those countries to do something? Is Jendayi Frazer, for example, doing a trip around the region? Is she calling meetings? I mean, what are you (inaudible)?

MR. MCCORMACK: She’s been working --

QUESTION: You can’t keep saying do something and --

MR. MCCORMACK: She – I know – she’s been working the phones. I know that the Brits, as well as others, have been working the phones on this issue. And you know, I can’t rule out the Secretary herself won’t be making some phone calls as well. We’ll try to keep you up to date on that.

QUESTION: Who has she called so far? Has she called a few (inaudible)?

MR. MCCORMACK: Nobody, thus far. We’ll keep you up to date.

Anything else? Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Yeah. On the Somali pirates, any update on a draft resolution that would allow the international forces to go after pirates on the mainland?

MR. MCCORMACK: Nothing for you on that. Again, we’re – you know, we addressed the issue, and I guess the framework issue at sea in passing – the rollover of 1816, which was – authorizes the use of all necessary means at sea. But if you – you have to address that at sea, you also have to address the sort of the root at – try to address some of the root issues on land. And we’re talking to colleagues up in the Security Council about how to do that, what the best way to do that is.

QUESTION: It would be by plane? It will be striking, bombing, or it will be –

MR. MCCORMACK: We’re still working on the politics of this.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. MCCORMACK: We’re still working on the politics of this.

Nina, did you have a question? You were --

QUESTION: One quickly about Pakistan. These guys are now under house arrest. Is there any pressure from the U.S. about them being taken out of house arrest, being sent to India? Anything like that going --

MR. MCCORMACK: We haven’t made any – any specific prescriptions. We’ve talked in general terms and in terms of principle about those responsible being held to account and facing justice. The Pakistani Government has demonstrated – it has acted on what we think are good instincts in terms of going after some of these individuals and extremist groups, and we’ll see what the next steps are. Ultimately, they’re going to have – I mean, they’re going to be the decision makers on this, but we can certainly make clear our views as well as others who can make clear their views.

QUESTION: But you’re not concerned that they might linger under indefinite house arrest?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, right now, just as a matter of principle, our – our concern is that any individuals not be able to be – be able to participate in any planning of violent acts, and that inasmuch as one possibly can, learn information that would help prevent future attacks.

Yeah.

QUESTION: So Pakistan believes that extraditing them to India is not an option. What would you say the other options are, then?

MR. MCCORMACK: Again, I’m not going to offer any particular options. I think I’ve outlined in principle how we see things.

QUESTION: All right. Can I just go back to Somalia for a second?

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, sure.

QUESTION: So there is or there is not a draft? You have or you have not written up a draft that calls for fighting the pirates on land?

MR. MCCORMACK: Honestly, Matt, I don’t know what state this effort is in. I’m sure words have been put to paper in trying to get at, you know, how do you get at the problem on land. And this gets wrapped up, as well, as an issue that we have been talking about for quite some time, about an international force that could assume the responsibilities that the Ethiopian forces in Somalia now have taken on in terms of trying to provide some greater security and stability there. So all of these questions at the moment are wrapped up in discussions in New York. I’ll try to find out for you exactly what state those discussions are in, whether or not they’ve reached a state of --

QUESTION: The Secretary General has put forward a suggestion to replace the current force with a multilateral force that is not a blue-helmeted UN force, that they would take over in the interim, that it would then – that would work towards – and work while peace talks were going on between the Islamists and the TFG.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: And then, once a ceasefire was signed, that would be replaced by a UN force. Is that --

MR. MCCORMACK: Let me --

QUESTION: -- something the U.S. supports, or are you looking at – are you wanting to move to a UN force sooner than that?

MR. MCCORMACK: Let me – I know that we’ve been working on trying to get an international force deployed urgently, and there have been a number of different options. Let me check for you, Matt, to see what we think about that specific proposal. I confess that I just don’t have the details.

Okay? All right.

QUESTION: Thanks.

(The briefing was concluded at 11:02 a.m.)

DPB#209

Released on December 11, 2008

President and Mrs. Bush Host Children's Holiday Reception and Performance VIDEO PODCAST

President George W. Bush embraces a group of youngsters Monday, Dec. 8, 2008, as he welcomes children attending the Children's Holiday Reception and Performance at the White House. White House photo by Eric Draper

President and Mrs. Bush Host Children's Holiday Reception and Performance FULL STREAMING VIDEO East Room 10:01 A.M. EST PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE THE PRESIDENT: Welcome to the White House. Yes! We're excited you are here. And we're excited you're here for a couple of reasons: One, we love to see the wonder in people's eyes when they get to see the majesty of the White House at this time of year. And I'm looking in your eyes and I'm seeing wonder.

Secondly, I am glad you're here because I wanted to thank your moms and dads for serving the United States of America. We love being with our military families because it gives us a chance to express the sincere and deep appreciation of all Americans for the sacrifices that families make. So I want to thank you for standing by your moms and dads, and telling them you're proud of them, and telling them you love them.

Thirdly, I'm going to ask you to do us a favor, and that is when you email mom or dad, just tell them you came by the White House -- (laughter) -- and the President and Laura, the First Lady, sent a special holiday greeting. So you'll be the messenger. So your job is to say we respect your mom and dad, we admire your mom and dad, and we pray for your mom and dad. So would you do that for us? CHILDREN: Yes. THE PRESIDENT: And fourthly, I'm glad to be here because I get to introduce my wife. (Laughter.) It's a pretty neat thing, isn't it? CHILDREN: Yes. THE PRESIDENT: Now, Laura tells me you've already seen Santa, had a few cookies --

President George W. Bush is smothered in little hands as he says goodbye to a group of childen in attendance Monday, Dec. 8, 2008, for the Children's Holiday Reception and Performance at the White House. The President and Mrs. Laura Bush traditionally invite children to a White House celebration for the holidays, and this year, the audience included kids of active duty and reserve military service members from Russell Elementary at Quantico Marine Base, Dahlgren School at Dahlgren Navy Base and West Meade Elementary at Ft. Meade Army Base. White House photo by Eric Draper Full Story

CHILDREN: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes? I'm surprised there's not more wiggling going on. (Laughter.) At any rate, please welcome my dear wife, First Lady Laura Bush. (Applause.)

MRS. BUSH: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And thank you to each and every one of you who've come today. Every year, at this time of year, at the holiday season, we have a really fun event with boys and girls from different parts of the country. And today I'm happy to welcome students here from Russell Elementary at Quantico Marine Base in Virginia. Where are all the Russell Elementary kids? Great. Thank you all for coming. Then we have some kids from Dahlgren School at Dahlgren Navy Base in Virginia. Thank you all for coming. And we have West Meade Elementary from Fort Meade Army Base in Maryland. Thanks so much for you all coming.

How many of you have a parent who's deployed? You have some parents who are in Iraq or Afghanistan, or somewhere else?

THE PRESIDENT: Or on a ship.

MRS. BUSH: Most of you don't? Okay. Well, thank your parents for all of us.

We have a very special treat for our entertainment today. First, though, I want you to look at these Christmas trees, and you can tell by looking at them what our holiday theme is, and that's it's "A Red, White, and Blue Christmas." Can you tell it?

CHILDREN: Yes.

MRS. BUSH: And what does that mean? What is red, white, and blue?

CHILDREN: Our flag.

MRS. BUSH: Our flag. That's right. Those are our country's colors -- red, white, and blue. So this is a chance, on our very last Christmas here at the White House, to celebrate our country. And we're doing it by painting everything red, white, and blue. You probably saw the bunting on the garlands in the hall. And then if you looked at the big, big, blue Christmas tree in the Blue Room, you saw all those ornaments that represent every part of the United States. Did you see any of those?

CHILDREN: Yes.

MRS. BUSH: Good. Okay, today we have a very special treat. We've invited a brass band to the White House to perform some fun versions of your favorite holiday songs. These musicians are right here -- from right here in Washington. They play at the United House of Prayer, which is a church in Anacostia. And we hope you'll enjoy their unique style of music, which is performed in a gospel brass band tradition particular to their denomination. See if you can hear how the band's 16 instruments come together to sound like a gospel choir, with trombones playing different voices in harmony.

So now, I'm delighted to introduce the Sweet Heaven Kings. (Applause.)

END 10:06 A.M. EST

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary December 8, 2008