Showing posts with label CBS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CBS. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Gary Johnson compares U.S. to Greece, laughs at Obama's economic plan


(CBS News) - The presidential nominee for the Libertarian Party, Gary Johnson, laughed at Mr. Obama's economic proposals before he offered a dire warning that the U.S. faces a monetary collapse.

In an interview with Hotsheet, the former Republican New Mexico governor harshly criticized President Obama's statement he made on the on the economy where he called on Congress to pass additional aid for states and provide support for the construction industry.

Watch video here.

Monday, April 2, 2012

Ron Paul: “I’m Trying to Save the Republican Party From Themselves”


Ron Paul had some important things to say (as usual) on CBS’ Face the Nation Sunday morning. Many Republicans say “I like Ron Paul, except on foreign policy.” But guess what? It is precisely on foreign policy where a majority of Americans now agree with Paul. Reported The Christian Science Monitor:

“The truth is, I’m trying to save the Republican Party from themselves because they want perpetual wars; they don’t care about presidents who assassinate American citizens; they don’t care about searching our houses without search warrants,” Paul said on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” Sunday.

In fact, many Americans also find troubling current government policy regarding warrantless searches and killing American citizens who have aligned themselves with terrorists bent on attacking the US.

But it is the war that’s gone on for more than 10 years in Afghanistan… where the public’s agreement with Paul seems most evident.

“Support for the war in Afghanistan has dropped sharply among both Republicans andDemocrats,” the New York Times reported this past week.

The assertion is based on the latest New York Times/CBS poll, which finds that opposition to the war jumped from 53 percent four months ago to 69 percent today.

Weariness with the war crosses party lines. While Republicans are more inclined to support the war, 60 percent say the war is going very or somewhat badly, and only about 30 percent of Republicans surveyed said the US should stay in Afghanistan…

In a floor speech in the House of Representatives recently, Paul warned that if the US isn’t out of Afghanistan by the end of the year, “we’ll be there for another decade.”

“The American people are now with us,” he said, and on that point he’s increasingly correct.

Republican candidates like Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich differ very little from the George W. Bush approach to foreign policy, and President Obama also has differed little on foreign policy from his predecessor. Americans are understandably war weary, and many feel they have nowhere to go.

Republicans who say “I like Ron Paul, except on foreign policy” better start considering Paul’s foreign policy views. Because without them, a majority of Americans might be saying “I like the Republican Party, except on foreign policy” in 2012 and beyond.

Source: Paulitical Ticker with Jack Hunter

Monday, January 30, 2012

Ron Paul in Close Competition with Obama in Latest Poll

New poll shows Texas Congressman within margin of error to unseat incumbent President
 
LAKE JACKSON, Texas – 2012 Republican Presidential candidate Ron Paul remains competitive in a head-to-head matchup against incumbent President Barack Obama, according to a new USA Today/Gallup poll.
 
Paul garners 46 percent of the vote to Obama’s 49 percent, within the +/- 4 percent margin of error for the survey.  Paul fares better among nationally registered voters than fellow GOP competitors Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.  Paul’s main competitor nationally, Mitt Romney, comes in tied with Obama at 48 percent, meaning Paul and Romney – the only candidates with the resources for a 50-state campaign – are within the error margin for unseating Obama.
 
“We’ve been saying this has been a two-man race between Ron Paul and Mitt Romney, and this poll is further proof.  The survey also demonstrates Ron Paul’s competitive edge against the sitting President in a general election since Paul is the candidate capable of gaining support from independents and disenfranchised Democrats,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton.
 
The results are based on telephone interviews conducted Jan. 27th and 28th, with a random sample of 907 registered voters, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
 
For full poll results and methodology in PDF form, please click here.
 
This poll follows a January 16th CNN/ORC Poll showing Paul and Obama in a virtual tie in a general election showdown.  It also follows a CBS Poll from earlier this month showing independent voters’ preference for Paul over Obama by 7 percentage points.

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

CBS: Independents Prefer Ron Paul Over Obama

From Forbes Magazine:
 
In a head-to-head matchup with incumbent President Barack Obama, the indie voter chooses Ron Paul, a CBS News poll suggested on Monday. A total of 47% of independent voters said they would choose Ron Paul compared to 45% of independent voters choosing Mitt Romney against Obama, and 41% of independents saying they would choose Rick Santorum.
 
 
Source: Revolution PAC. Photo courtesy Gage Skidmore

Monday, January 9, 2012

Paul Most Electable Against Obama

Reports National Journal (emphasis mine):
 
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, run neck-and-neck with President Obama in a general-election matchup, according to a new CBS News poll released late on Monday that shows the two front-runners in Tuesday’s New Hampshire GOP primary running stronger against the president than their fellow Republicans.
 
Romney posts a two-point lead over Obama, 47 percent to 45 percent, within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points. He leads Obama, 45 percent to 39 percent, among independent voters.
 
Obama’s lead over Paul is just one point, 46 percent to 45 percent, as Paul leads among independents by 7 points.
 
The president posts more significant leads over the other GOP candidates, but against each he is below the critical 50-percent threshold: He leads former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, 49 percent to 41 percent; former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, 48 percent to 41 percent; Texas Gov. Rick Perry, 49 percent to 42 percent; and former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., 47 percent to 43 percent…
 
The CBS News poll was conducted Jan. 4-8, surveying 1,413 adults, for a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points. The poll includes a subsample of 1.247 registered voters.
 
Source: Paulitical Ticker with Jack Hunter

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Ron Paul’s Mainstream Foreign Policy

Writes Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic:
 
Remember when Paul belonged to the minority in Congress that opposed the Iraq War? Now, 62 percent of Americans say fighting the Iraq war was a mistake. You know the Republicans who criticized President Obama for presiding over the end of America’s military presence in Iraq? Well, like Paul (and unlike Obama) 78 percent of Americans support full withdrawal. And in Afghanistan, another country that Paul wants to leave, two thirds of Americans want to see troop levels reduced. “Just one in three Americans believe fighting there is the right thing for the U.S. to do,” CBS News found, “while 57 percent think the U.S. should not be involved in Afghanistan.”
 
Like Ron Paul, Americans are also overwhelmingly against bombing Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. And although I’ll bet he wants to cut the Pentagon budget more than the average American does, a majority of the public prefers defense cuts to other kinds, and as Rasmussen found earlier this year, “Nearly one-half of Americans now think the United States can make major cuts in defense spending without putting the country in danger. They believe even more strongly that there’s no risk in cutting way back on what America spends to defend other countries.”
 
Comparing Paul’s positions to those of either the American people or foreign-affairs experts in the State Department and academia, it is clear that his views are closer to normal than most of his Republican opponents’… On the biggest, most consequential foreign policy issues, he is averse to war, as are his countrymen. It is only when they are compared to the views of the Washington establishment, where the Washington Post op-ed page, the Weekly Standard, and the American Enterprise Institute are regarded as mainstream institutions, that Paul’s foreign-policy views seem like the abnormal ones.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Ron Paul Campaign Chairman Blasts CBS News

SPARTANBURG, S.C. – Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton released the following statement concerning the CBS / National Journal Republican debate:
 
“Ron Paul consistently polls among the top three in the key early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire.  He is polling in double digits in most respected polls.
 
“Congressman Paul is ranked among the top three in fundraising results.
 
“Congressman Paul serves on the House Foreign Relations Committee.
 
“Congressman Paul is a veteran.
 
“And, Congressman Paul has contrasting views on foreign policy that many Americans find worthy of inquiry and discussion.
 
“CBS’s treatment of Congressman Paul is disgraceful, especially given that tonight’s debate centered on foreign policy and national security.
 
“Congressman Paul was only allocated 90 seconds of speaking in one televised hour.  If we are to have an authentic national conversation on issues such as security and defense, we can and must do better to ensure that all voices are heard.
 
“CBS News, in their arrogance, may think they can choose the next president. Fortunately, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire, and across America get to vote and not the media elites.”

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Interview With Scott Pelley of CBS Evening News

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateWashington, DC

QUESTION: Thank you, Madam Secretary. You are in close coordination with all of the European Union countries, and I wonder how much confidence you have that the European nations are going to be able to create a soft landing for their debt crisis that doesn’t wreck the economy here in the United States?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Scott, I think it’s very clear that the global economy has made us even more interdependent, and we’ve seen that in so many ways over the last three years. We are certainly supporting what the Europeans are trying to do. Our Treasury Secretary and other officials are in constant communication with their counterparts. Obviously, the President has spoken with his, and I’ve spoken with mine. And this is a very challenging economic time for many of us, but I believe that we’ll see actions taken that will provide the so-called soft landing that you’re talking about.

QUESTION: The stock market is terribly worried about Europe right now. I wonder what your confidence level is?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I’m confident that we’re going to weather this crisis, and not just our own country, because I think that we have very strong reasons to be confident, but I think also, our partners around the world, most particularly in Europe. That doesn’t mean we can be complacent, it doesn’t mean that it’s going to take care of itself. It requires concerted action by governments and by businesses in order to reclaim the lost ground and get growth going again, because ultimately, it is about jobs for people. It’s about people feeling that they have a stake in their own future.

And I think we do have to all pay more attention to how we’re going to create jobs in the so-called developed world that are going to be available for the vast majority of middle-income and lower-income men and women, who are being basically marginalized in the way the global economy is growing.

QUESTION: The Obama Administration has described Bashar al-Asad as illegitimate, and I wonder if it’s time for him to go?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, that’s going to be up to the Syrian people, but I can tell you that President Obama and I have been working very hard to marshal international opinion. When we started with our criticism of Asad, people, to be very frank, kind of said, “Well, yeah, the United States doesn’t get along with Syria, so that’s to be expected.” And we have spent an enormous amount of diplomatic time and effort creating what is a crescendo of condemnatory comments from an increasingly large chorus of international opinion.

And what is important is that the Syrian people know that the United States is on the side of a peaceful transition to democracy. We believe that they have the same right as people anywhere to choose their own leaders, to have the kind of democratic institutions that will maximize their individual opportunities. But we also took a long time convincing even our colleagues on the Security Council to issue a statement, which we finally got done about 10 days ago. And then in rapid succession, we’ve seen the Arab League, we’ve seen the King of Saudi Arabia, we’ve seen the Gulf Cooperating Council, we’ve seen a very strong stand by Turkey and certainly our European friends.

So we are building what I think is a much more persuasive case that the international community – not just the United States – wants to see peaceful change in Syria.

QUESTION: You’re talking about U.S. leadership. Why doesn’t the U.S. lead and take that one half step further and say that Asad’s time is done; he has to go?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we’ve been very clear in what we have said about his loss of legitimacy. I think we were among the very first to say it. We’ve sent a very clear message that he should be doing what is necessary to end the violence against his own people. But it’s important that it’s not just the American voice, and we want to make sure that those voices are coming from around the world. And the Russians and the Chinese joined our presidential statement, after saying that they would never do anything to condemn the Asad regime.

We’ve issued more sanctions, tougher sanctions. We’re working with our European and other friends. But what we really need to do to put the pressure on Asad is to sanction the oil and gas industry, and we want to see Europe take more steps in that direction. And we want to see China take steps with us. We want to see India, because India and China have large energy investments inside of Syria. We want to see Russia cease selling arms to the Asad regime.

So I come from the school that we want results, not rhetoric. And what we have done for the last several months is – behind the scenes and in front of the cameras – to build the pressure on Asad and the people around him. There’s no doubt in anyone’s mind where the United States stands. We’ve reached out to the opposition, we have been very proud of our ambassador, who has carried the message of our country and our values right into Hama, into the heart of the Syrian repression. So I think we have done what is actually going to pay off rather than just rhetorically calling for him to go.

QUESTION: Asad right at this moment seems to be pressing for the end – attacking his people, attacking his cities in a most vigorous way to put an end to it before the pressure you describe ousts him from power.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, but I think the pressure requires an organized opposition, and there isn’t one, Scott. There is a lot of sort of beginning sprouts of such an opposition. There are local coordination councils around the country. There are very brave Syrians who are standing up and risking their lives, even losing their lives. There are Syrian opposition figures outside of Syria and inside. But there’s no address for the opposition. There is no place that any of us who wish to assist can go. So part of what we’ve been encouraging and trying to facilitate is for the opposition to become unified.

Syria has a lot of divisions, and one of the reasons why this has been challenging for those of us who have been watching from the outside is that there are many communities – minority communities within Syria – who are, frankly, saying the devil we know is better than the devil we don’t. And so they have continued in Damascus, in Aleppo, to support the Syrian regime not because they agree with what is being done, but because they’re worried about what could come next. So part of what we’ve been doing is to encourage the opposition to adopt the kind of unified agenda rooted in democratic change, inclusivity. So if you’re a Christian, if you’re a Kurd, if you’re a Druze, if you’re an Alawite, if you’re a Sunni, inside Syria there will be a place for you in the future.

So I know everybody gets very impatient. They’d like to see change yesterday. Well, we certainly think Syria deserves democracy, but we also know that you have to replace somebody with somebody else, and that somebody else is still in formation.

QUESTION: Last question before Somalia, but relating to something that you mentioned a moment ago: Is the United States going to sanction the oil and gas industries that are involved in Syria?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yeah. We have very little stake in it, so it’s not – so again, we have such a small stake in what they produce and what they market. The real trick is to convince the Europeans and the Arabs and the Chinese and the Indians and others. Because again, I mean, we’re going to sanction, and we have been upping the sanctions. We’re going to continue to do so. But we want others to follow, because Syria was not one of our major economic partners. It wasn’t anybody that we had a particularly good relationship with before this all started, although we were open to improving the relationship if they showed that they were going to make changes. And obviously, that’s not in the cards right now.

QUESTION: You’re not going to say he has to go?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We are, I think, building the chorus of international condemnation. And rather than us saying it and nobody else following, we think it’s important to lead and have others follow as well.

QUESTION: What are your concerns about al-Shabaab in Somalia?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I have many concerns about al-Shabaab. Al-Shabaab is a terrorist group. Al-Shabaab has been particularly brutal, even barbaric, to the people under their control, even before this famine has so devastated the Somali people. Al-Shabaab has imposed the worst kind of punishments for what they consider to be violations of their particularly perverted, distorted view of Islam. And so they have posed a threat to the United States and to our friends and neighbors. They were behind an attack in Kampala, Uganda because Uganda has been very important in our efforts to try to beat back al-Shabaab, and we’ve made progress, thanks to an organized African effort supported by the United States and others.

But what we’ve seen in recent weeks just beggars the imagination, Scott. I mean, it’s one thing to have a view of religion that is so brutal and totally at odds with anything that anyone else believes, but it’s something entirely different to prevent women and children from getting to a place where they could be saved, where the children could be fed, where women wouldn’t be watching their babies die in their arms. And we have seen no indication that al-Shabaab has a heart. This is Ramadan. If there were ever a time for a group that claims to be adhering to their own form of Islam – they apparently don’t know what Ramadan means, because they are doing nothing to assist the international community or even on their own to assist the people that they control.

And I’ve called on them and their leaders to show some mercy and some compassion. We can get back to squaring off against one another after we save the lives of women and children. So far, we’ve seen no evidence that they’re willing to do that.

QUESTION: Is the United States Government aiding the training of anti-Shabaab militias in Somalia?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the United States Government helps to fund the AMISOM Mission, and the AMISOM Mission has made the difference between clawing back territory from al-Shabaab and losing all of Somalia to this terrorist group. So we have, for a long time, supported African troops under an African mission to work with the Transitional Federal Government that is in place in Mogadishu. And I have seen progress over the last two and a half years. I met with the head of the TFG in Kenya in August of 2009 and --

QUESTION: The Transitional Federal Government.

SECRETARY CLINTON: The Transitional Federal Government. Look, they have a long way to go. They are only learning on the job, so to speak, about how to govern. Somali-Americans have gone home to Mogadishu to try to help prevent this perversion that al-Shabaab practices from destroying their country.

But Somalia has been in turmoil and living with violence for a very long time now. We all remember, first, President George H. W. Bush and then President Clinton trying to help the Somali people in the early ’90s. And it was a very terrible incident with our soldiers being killed and mistreated. So the world, for a number of years, said, “Look, Somalia is just too violent, too complex. We cannot deal with it.” And at that time, there was a lot of – it was mostly an inter-clan conflict.

But what we’ve seen in the last several years is the rise of al-Shabaab, which proudly claims some affinity with al-Qaida, which tries to work with al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb. And so this then became a direct threat to us, not just a tragedy on the ground in Somalia, but a threat to not only the United States but the rest of the world.

QUESTION: In addition to the African Union forces, are we supporting or providing training or providing the money for training of other militias inside Somalia?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we’re doing what we can to support Uganda and others who are part of the AMISOM Mission to do what they need to do to help not only beat back al-Shabaab, but to help train an indigenous Somali force to stand on its own against al-Shabaab.

QUESTION: And training is integral to that?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Of course it is. I mean, part of the challenge is making sure that people are trained to use equipment, to know how to engage in the kind of warfare to deal with the threat of suicide bombers. I mean, there’s a lot that has to be learned. It’s – it is certainly welcome that people would want to stand up and fight for their family and their country, but they need to be able to know how to do it.

QUESTION: When you see these pictures that are coming out of the famine emergency, what do you think?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right. Well, it just breaks my heart because there is no doubt that some of this is the unfortunate consequence of weather patterns, of drought. But I would say most of it is because of bad policies and bad people, and that’s what really upsets me.

An act of God is an act of God. You deal with an earthquake, you deal with a tsunami. But there is so much more we could do to help in this, and we’ve tried to. We fund something called the Famine Early Warning System Network. It gave us an indication last year that a famine was on the way, and not just because of weather patterns but because of violence, because of conflict, because of inaccessible areas to be able to provide support. So we pre-position food. And we’ve worked with the Governments of Ethiopia and Kenya. We’ve certainly worked to support the UN and both American and international NGOs. But then you see these pictures and you know how many people are dying because they can’t get help where they are, because you have this terrorist group, al-Shabaab, that has no regard for the lives of the people in the areas they control.

QUESTION: How is the United States responding to the emergency?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we are responding very effectively in the face of a very large challenge. We’re by far the largest donor, over $550 million that we have put into trying to help save lives. We’re not only providing emergency foodstuffs – particularly what is needed when you’re terribly malnourished and you can’t eat whole food; you have to have nutritional supplements – but also we’re helping with water, we’re helping with sanitation and healthcare, we’re trying to vaccinate people so that there are not epidemics in the refugee camps. We’re supporting Kenya, which has been an extremely gracious host to hundreds of thousands of Somalis who have come over their border over the last years because of the fighting there. And we’re working with the Government of Ethiopia.

But at the same time, Scott – and I want to emphasize this because the American people are very generous and we do respond to tragedies and natural disasters – we have to change the trajectory here. And so what we did from the very beginning of this Administration was to say, look, we are the best at responding to food disasters. The United States is the major supporter of the World Food Program. We’re there with food. We set up this early warning system. We are great at responding to disasters.

But we’ve got to do more to change the underlying conditions. So we started a program called Feed the Future, which represents the best thinking in agricultural productivity, in nutritional supplementation, in marketing of food, everything that goes into what makes for greater self-sufficiency. And Ethiopia and Kenya are two of the countries we’ve been working with over the last two and a half years. What are policies that need to be changed at the governmental level that encourage more food production?

And the last time there was a famine in Ethiopia – I’m old enough to remember, the pictures were very similar to what you’re showing – it affected 12 million people. This year, this famine is affecting about 5 million in the area. Now, 5 million is still an unacceptably high number, but it’s a big improvement because we’ve worked with both farmers and pastoralists to try to help them do more to sustain themselves – drought-resistant seeds, for example, better irrigation techniques and the like. So it’s not just that we’re responding to the emergency, first and foremost. We’re also trying to change the underlying conditions.

QUESTION: Last question: You mentioned the United States has contributed more than half a billion dollars --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: -- to this emergency in --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: -- the Horn of Africa. Some reasonable people would say this is a terrible, terrible tragedy, but we can’t afford that.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well --

QUESTION: And I wonder what you would say to them.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I would say look at these pictures. And the one thing that Americans are so well known for, not only through our government but through our religious faith-based institutions, through private charities, through individual giving, is our heart. No matter what anybody says about us anywhere in the world, people have to admit that when there’s trouble anywhere, Americans are there. We’re there to help, and we’re there to do the very best we can to try to alleviate suffering. That’s part of the DNA of the American character. We certainly can afford to do what is necessary now.

Obviously, we’re all having to tighten our belts in this tough budgetary climate, but I have the great honor of heading the State Department and USAID, our two civilian agencies that – we don’t carry weapons; we carry food and we negotiate treaties, we try to help governments get better. It’s an insurance policy both against tragedy happening, but it’s also our way of responding when the inevitable – because given human nature, we’re going to face these kinds of terrible calamities – that we show who we are as a people. And I would hate to think that our country would ever back off from that.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Interview with Bob Schieffer of CBS's Face the Nation

Interview
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateWashington, DC
January 30, 2011

QUESTION: We’re just off the line with Liz Palmer, our person in Cairo, and during her report, F-16s, Egyptian air force warplanes, apparently were flying low over the demonstrators in the main part of Cairo. Do you know what this is about?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Bob, I don’t, and let me repeat again what President Obama and I have been saying, and that is to urge the Egyptian security forces to show restraint, to not respond in any way through violence or intimidation. That falls upon the peaceful protestors who are demanding that their grievances be heard. And obviously, our reports up until now have been that the Egyptian army had taken up positions, that they were showing such restraint. And we strongly urge that that continue.

What the people who are in
Tahrir Square
and elsewhere in Egypt are protesting for is the right to participate in their government, to have economic opportunity, for their human rights to be respected. We are very clearly asking both in public and private that the Egyptian authorities respond to that, that they start a process of national dialogue that will lead to a transition to such democracy, and what President Mubarak himself said the other day – that they would begin to take concrete steps for democratic and economic reform – we expect to see happen.

QUESTION: Madam Secretary, do you think those things are possible if President Mubarak stays in office, or is he eventually going to have to leave?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’m not going to speculate, Bob. What we are focused on now is a transition that will meet the needs of the Egyptian people and that will truly establish democracy, not just for one election and then no more elections after that, or not for radicals, extremists, violent elements to take over. We want to see the – what really was at the core of the protests, which were people saying, “Hey, we deserve a better life. We deserve more opportunity to be respected and responded to.” And that is what we’ve been conveying and that’s what we will continue to make very clear, and we stand ready to assist.

QUESTION: Do you – are you concerned that if President Mubarak does go, it may give an opportunity for the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been the opposition to his government for so many years, could somehow come to power? I think most people agree they were not the start of this or the cause of these demonstrations. But where do you see – what role do you see them playing if Mr. – President Mubarak should go?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, I’m not speculating about who goes or who stays. And I’m not prepared to comment on what kind of democratic process the Egyptian people can construct for themselves. But we obviously want to see people who are truly committed to democracy, not to imposing any ideology on Egyptians. And therefore, we would like to encourage that people who have been the voice of protest and been the voice of civil society be the ones at the table trying to design what would be an orderly transition to meet the democratic and economic needs of the people.

Bob, we’re all very conscious of the fact that Egypt is an incredibly important country, a large country with great influence in the region and meaning for the Arab world. And we want to see the outcome of what started as peaceful protests legitimately demanding redress for grievances to result in a true democracy. Not a phony one like we saw with Iranian elections, not to see a small group that doesn’t represent the full diversity of Egyptian society take over and try to impose their own religious or ideological beliefs. We want to see the full diversity and dynamism of Egyptian society represented.

QUESTION: Do you believe that his appointment of a new vice president – is that helpful?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, it’s something that American Government representatives have been urging and requesting for 30 years. I talked – I’ve talked with former ambassadors over the last weeks who have said, “Boy, I remember when I went in in 1980-this or 1990-that.” So yes, it’s something we have said is absolutely imperative. It finally has happened. There are some new people taking responsibility in government. We hope that they can contribute to the kind of democratic and economic reforms that the people of Egypt deserve.

QUESTION: So far, though, it does not seem that anything that Mr. Mubarak has said or done up until this point has, in any way, tempered these demonstrations. I mean, things seem to be getting worse rather than better.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think there are several things going on. But first and foremost, words alone are not enough. There have to be actions. There has to be a demonstrable commitment to the kind of reforms that we all know are needed and desired, but also too, there is now, unfortunately, in addition to the legitimate, peaceful protests that are going on, lots of reports of looting, prison breaks, and the like. So it makes the situation much more complicated than it even was before, because everyone wants to ensure that the right of assembly, the right of association, the right of free expression be protected, that there be no violence against the protests.

At the same time, people in the streets have to refrain from violence themselves. And I’ve heard many stories of Egyptians protecting their national museum, protecting their homes. And they’re protecting them from looters and from criminals. So this is an incredibly complex set of circumstances, and we are hoping and praying that the authorities will be able to respond to the legitimate requests for participation by the peaceful protestors. Let’s begin to see some meetings with representatives of the government and representatives of civil society. Let’s begin to see some steps taken that will lead toward free, fair, and credible elections in the future.

Those will begin to put some substance behind the words and give the protestors who are trying to see a future for Egypt that is responsive to their needs a reality that they can hang onto.

QUESTION: All right. Madam Secretary, thank you so much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

This transcript was released to the public by the State Department