Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Cohen's Confusion

Cohen first says the Administration takes the position of supporting legislation for a federal takeover of CNMI's immigration.

Cohen then states that three offices in the White House viewed and approved his prepared statements.

Cohen fails to mention that it was not in his prepared statements that he stated that the Administration supports legislation for a federal takeover of CNMI's immigration. He stated that the Administration supports a federal take over during the questions and answers period -- which cannot be preapproved.

When questioned again for a recent media interview, he says that it is true that the Administration does NOT take a position on legislation for a federal takeover of CNMI's immigration.

So, Cohen states that the Administration supports legislation for a federal takeover of CNMI's immigration. Then, the public finds out that the Administration has no opinion on the issue. Then, Cohen says his prepared statements were cleared by the White House. Then he states that the Administration does not have a position on the federal takeover of the CNMI's immigration.

Bottom line -- Cohen states that the White House takes no position on the issue of a federal take over of the CNMI.

http://www.saipantribune.com/newsstory.aspx?newsID=66318&cat=1

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

What a joke!

Does Cohen actually thing the people of the CNMI are stupid?! We can all see through his spin. What is sad is that he actually, states that the White House has no policy. Hello? Earth to Cohen, this is not what you have been saying in the media! I am not sure about you, but his statements to the press seem very "opinionated" about the OIA policy in regards to Federalization of our borders. In fact, he goes so far as endorsing the legislation initiative. Isn't that a "policy" stance? Does he have approval to support legislation? I don't think so. Cohen, give it up, just admit you are PRO-FEDERALIZATION.

We all know your obvious belief, just make sure from now on you own up to it and not pass it as if were US White House Policy.

Bruce M said...

Written vs. Spoken

Ahhhhh, the art of "spin".

Cohen on the defense because he was caught with his pants down. I love it! If you notice him wiggle through today's article you will see he keeps referring to "written testimony" and never mentions his Q&A portion, or "spoken testimony". In that "spoken" testimony, Cohen clearly answers what the administration's policy is when asked by Chairman Bingaman.

Here are his words as posted by "Anonymous" on March 6 to the “Polosi/Cohen/….Tester?” blog.

Chairman Bingaman: “….so is it the administration’s position that it wants to work with Congress to develop (federal immigration) legislation that will be sensitive to these problems and can be passed in this Congress? Is that the administration’s position?”

Dep Asst Sec Cohen: “YES………we are absolutely ready to work with our congress on good (federal immigration) legislation. We don’t necessarily say that that is the only option but we are here ready to work with you to fashion good (federal immigration) legislation…

Chairman Bingaman: “is there a better option”

Dep Asst Sec Cohen: “Perhaps not…..good (federal immigration) legislation perhaps is the best option and we are still studying that and we are studying that and the a legislation that had been passed before in light of a current circumstances and current needs, I think mostly we want to make sure that we don’t inadvertently do anything that would be harmful”

Chairman Bingaman: “right….in 2001 the administration strongly supported the bill that this committee reported out and passed through the full senate, a I guess you are saying that a you are a little luke warm on the whole idea of us passing (federal immigration) legislation in this area now…or am I misreading that?….I am just trying, I’m trying to figure out to what extent is the administration is willing to … to fully engage with the congress with this committee in developing (federal immigration) legislation that we can then move ahead with”

Dep Asst Sec Cohen: “yeah…Mr. Chairman I would not say that we are luke warm about working with you to pass (federal immigration) legislation, we are just cautioning a…you know…against a the potential side effects of bad (federal immigration) legislation….but I think good (federal immigration) legislation which is something that would result in the type of process that we are all talking about a….can really help the situation and put the CNMI on a path to a much stronger and more secure future”


If you were to ask anyone who reads this, they would say that this sounds like the US White House wants Federalization of the CNMI.

Chairman Bingaman even through him a life preserver when he asked if the Administration was "luke warm" on the idea....meaning "no opinion"...BUT NO>>>>>>Cohen outright disagreed and said the US Administration is NOT luke warm, but looking to work on good legislation.

No wonder Cohen didn’t mention this part……

No way for him to “wiggle” or “spin” his way out of these statements.

FollowTheMoney said...

Cohen is boxed in. It's a trade off with the Democrats. Throw the CNMI to the dogs and save his Samoa. He should realize that Samoa would be safe anyway with all the money they raise the Dems.

The Saipan Blogger said...

You've really taken to blogging...even if you are far right wing. Good work.

Sarah Miel said...

Sapain Blogger, thank you for your kind words and thoughts. :-)

Although there are different views on what is good for the CNMI -- we can all agree that when outsiders demonize our Islands -- it doesn't help our situation. Worse yet, when legislation is rushed when we have little/no say one must wonder. Whether we agree or disagree on this federal takeover issue, we must all agree that it's sad that legislation regarding the CNMI is prompted not by the needs of our people, but rather by other's political motivations to harm us.

Hubba Hubba said...

I'd like to see Gin Gridley interview David Cohen. She could ask him whether or not the Administration supports a federal takeover. He could say yes one minute then no the next. He could get away with it, because the viewers wouldn't catch on. We'd all be tooooooo busy watching Gin.

She would then ask him difficult emotional questions and make him cry. She's like a Barbara Walters and he Vanilla Ice.

Gin and Ice -- How nice. :-)

Anonymous said...

Fo sizzle my nizzle. Gin Gridley isa spunky fit booya kasha. Whun i watcha i gets excited. She makes me wanna chill my crazy foo man chuauau.