Chuck Todd Interviews Robert Gibbs On "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," Health Care Reform, Stimulus (VIDEO)

NBC's Chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd, filling for Chris Matthews as host of "Hardball" tonight, conducted a lengthy interview with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Todd questioned Gibbs on whether the White House really thought that Congress could handle all the items on President Obama's agenda, including energy legislation, health care reform, and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT). Gibbs, coming off a pretty significant victory in getting climate change legislation through the House, sounded quite confident, even saying they could handle "financial regulatory reform" and place Sotomayor on the Court in good time:

There's no doubt that it will be hard. The easiest thing for this town to do is the same old thing. I think we've proven, in a short period of time, we're not afraid to tackle a lot of big issues, and I think we've seen progress in Congress dealing with a lot on their plate.

Todd brought up the stimulus package, calling it a "political football" for Republicans. He asked Gibbs point-blank when we should start to judge whether it's working or not. Gibbs replied," I think we should begin to judge it now." Todd then pressed Gibbs, asking to judge it on what, and if we should include recent job losses. Gibbs backed off a bit, and told Todd that we should take the "long view." Gibbs called the stimulus a two-year plan, "so it's not all gonna be fixed in 90 or a 100 days."

At the end of the interview, Todd played a clip of Gibbs saying firmly that the Obama administration would end DADT, and then a clip from a month ago Gibbs appearing to soften its position by saying they want Congress to do it. Gibbs gave lackluster responses, especially when later asked why Obama doesn't stop the discharges of critical gay service members, like Arabic translators. However Gibbs did emphasize that when Obama faces re-election in 2012, DADT will have been repealed.

Watch the interview below.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Comments

[WIKANDER]

07:41 PM on 06/30/2009

I am not commenting on this interview other than to say: Chuck Todd should be the new "Meet the Press" host!!!!! David Gregory could be MSNBC White House Reporter!

[lared]

11:51 AM on 06/30/2009

backwards country. Like Sodom and Gomorrah?

[WoodyCPM]

09:30 AM on 06/30/2009

They're afraid. They're scared of the political fallout from the Pentagon of even stopping the discharges, let alone actually overturning the DADT. GIbbs says in response to the question, "Why not for now just stop the discharges": GIBBS: "Because it will only exacerbate getting rid of the law in the long run." He says this with a straight (pun intended) face and gives no hard evidence that this would be true other than a bunch of scardy-cat mumbo-jumbo. They're wussus.

[MRb1000]

09:25 AM on 06/30/2009

The house and senate along with the military should address this issues. They need to change the law! The President is right. He will sign what the the house and senate write into law! I agree this is the way to go.

I know some who never wore the uniform are going to be upset, but you do not understand anything about the military to understand what goes on in the military. You do not have the same right as civilians. You are force to do things. You do not have a choice.

You are need to understand this is an intimate issue within the military! If you do not like it get over it because this is the way to handle it.

[cminca]

12:17 PM on 06/30/2009

Harry Truman would not have agreed with your comment.

He stopped integration because it was the right thing to do and "the buck stops here."

Leadership, in 2009, would be change we could believe in.

[CigarGod]

01:21 PM on 06/30/2009

Well, I'm an old vet.
The military is part of America and subject to it's laws.
Make a law, add enforcement and things change.

In our oath, our first duty is to uphold the constitution.

[scarab23]

09:00 AM on 06/30/2009

Americans, all equal people... except for you, and you, and you, and yes, you too. What hypocritical political BS. There is no time like "NOW" to do the right thing.

[pbziegler]

09:04 AM on 06/30/2009

Amen to that.

[Frenbar]

08:31 AM on 06/30/2009

If it wasn't so sad it would be amusing.

All the momentous problems our country faces, and the issue that Chuck Todd finds most important is a rule governing the park of the makeup of our army.

How about grilling him about the purpose and existance of our army Chuck? How about asking tough questions about why we spend trillions to occupy nations around the world with this army? Perhaps a tough question about why our army is torturing and killing thousands around the world, and why the Obama administration is refusing to release evidence of these crimes, or prosecute those responsible? How about asking tough questions about just who is joining this army, and what lies they are being told to entice them to enlist? What about a question about the hundreds of thousands of former soldiers that are unleashed on society without treatment after years in a warzone with PTSD and other physical and mental problems?

How much better off would we all be if we never heard another public debate or mention of gays or abortion? With so many pressing problems, how much more time to we have to invest in these too largely insignificant issues?

[dillydawg]

09:23 AM on 06/30/2009

if only.......

[Klatu68]

08:23 AM on 06/30/2009

chuckster demonstrates again what an incompetent and intontinent white house correspondent he is. he needs to go back to electoral numbers. he plays the lamest kind of gotcha games, not journalism.

[OhComeOnNow]

09:30 AM on 06/30/2009

Agreed. He is not a good on air interviewer and should stay behind the camera. He makes the other substitute hosts look good. We will not be watching the rest of this week's show.

[MalakAlHaq]

07:16 AM on 06/30/2009

The real story here is how Chuck Todd is a better host than Chris Matthews.

Tough questions followed by listening.

If you read this Tweetie -- Stop interrupting people and let them speak! We want their answers not some affirmation of how smart you are.

[dillydawg]

09:20 AM on 06/30/2009

Always talking and hardly listening is not an indication ofhow smart you are. Chuck Todd is in love w/Chuck Todd and is amazed at the very sound of his voice.

[Klatu68]

09:15 PM on 06/30/2009

He is/was a good guy when he was the brainy numbers guy during the election. Give him credit for that. A Wh House correspondent he is not, by style or skill.

[AnotherTry]

07:10 AM on 06/30/2009

I think Gibbs is a closet-case. Every time I hear him or see him, my gaydar goes of the charts.

[dillydawg]

09:22 AM on 06/30/2009

He has a 5 yr old and is married, However, so what if he was gay? Get off the stale old gossip mongering.

[Steve Connolly]

06:05 AM on 06/30/2009

Once again, all the "big brains" have missed the patently obvious. "Don't ask, don't tell?" Recycled drivel!
How about this really really really good idea. An all-gay military.

[WoodyCPM]

09:19 AM on 06/30/2009

It worked for the Spartans. And the Roman army, that conquered the known world, was also populated with men who enjoyed the company of other men.

[WoodyCPM]

09:21 AM on 06/30/2009

Only in America do we have a bunch of straight pantywaists who get all silly and squemish around real men.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

05:16 AM on 06/30/2009

Argh.

Chuck Todd is just awful. He always seems grossly uncomfortable as if he just woke up and found himself in front of the camera. He seems startled by it all. He was good with the numbers during the election, but he is just horrible as a reporters. It is as if he does no research and just talks off the top of his head.

Argh. Ugh.

[KevinFletcherTweedy]

03:53 AM on 06/30/2009

As Rachel Maddow (and others) have rightly observed, the proper thing to do AT THIS MOMENT is to sign a "stop loss" suspension of any "accused" (or self-confessed) individuals from being cashiered out of the service in which they serve. Now! No silly delays, no silly discussion about the "eventual solution" and priorities. Sort out the law changes later, but don't toss a continuing stream of valued, experienced personnel on the sad slag heap of history of the "last ones to suffer". It's the RIGHT thing to do!

[We-Are-The-Ones]

05:12 AM on 06/30/2009

The proper thing to do is to follow the law. We already saw what a President can do when he decides the law is his to ignore or manipulate. This is how we got Torture under Bush.

If we want DADT to not be the law, repeal it through Congress. If we do not want to wait, then let's push this aggressively. There is already a bill in the House, with 120 co-sponsors. Senator Gillibrand (NY) said she would put forth legislation in the Senate.

Let's lobby to get DADT off the books rather than ignore existing law.

[manlambda]

08:24 AM on 06/30/2009

Sorry We but you are wrong again. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the president issuing the stop gap measure. If you stuck to you reasoning he wouldn't have signed the executive order to hold detainees indefinitately. You can't have it both ways.
The reson he should sign it is because while Congress works on DADT service members will be able to serve openly. It will give them political coverage by saying look gay men and women are serving openly and the sky hasn't fallen. It makes it a slam dunk. Let's stop giving the president a pass which you seem to always want to do.

[WoodyCPM]

09:41 AM on 06/30/2009

At one time, the country was full of laws that prevented people of color and women from having full and equal civil rights with white men. People defied them at every turn. Even governmental agencies and some governors and Presidents defied them and undermined them. Let's get busy.

[Charmed]

07:24 AM on 06/30/2009

How about following the law and when it changes then it changes. Gays are NOT the last ones to suffer. A lot of people suffer in this world. People are orphans, hungry or homeless so not being able to get married is not the worst thing in the world so please stop acting like this is the ONLY important issue out there.

[superstition]

03:11 AM on 06/30/2009

"The 1957 Crittenden report found that gay men posed no great national security risk in terms of susceptibility to extortion.

The 1988 PERSEREC/Sarbin-Karols report concluded that homosexuality was as unrelated to military job performance, as was right- or left-handedness.

The 1989 PERSEREC/McDaniel study found that in terms of background characteristics prior to entering military service, gay men were "as good or better than the average heterosexual" in terms of suitability for positions of trust -- that is, gay men did not appear to be a national security risk.

The 1993 RAND study was (clearly) not the first time that a group of researchers had reached the conclusion that the sexual identity of service personnel is not relevant to military service or job performance.

The RAND report was unique in that it was the first time the research was ordered by politically accountable members of the executive branch rather than by politically insulated members of the military services. And the RAND report was made public almost immediately, while the Crittenden report was buried for 32 years. The PERSEREC/Sarbin-Karols report was tied up by the Pentagon for almost a year. The second PERSEREC report (McDaniel) was never submitted to DOD."

http://books.google.com/books?id=Go9XsJ47GswC

[We-Are-The-Ones]

05:21 AM on 06/30/2009

I do not think this is the type of review the Pentagon is undertaking.

As I understand it, the DOD and the Pentagon are undertaking a review of how DADT's repeal can be implemented. But as Admiral Mullens said, the military stands ready now to do whatever is necessary if DADT is repealed.

Lobby Congress to repeal DADT.

[WoodyCPM]

09:45 AM on 06/30/2009

How it can be implemented? They're studying it? Why? What do these a*#@@ want? Separate showers? You "implement" it by doing away with the law. Voila, it's implemented. Stop treating gay men and lesbians as some kind of special "other" class of people. They're not.

[Manx]

02:38 AM on 06/30/2009

I think Obama, the Commander-In-Chief, is afraid of the military. He's intimidated by all those medals.

[tishimself]

12:37 AM on 06/30/2009

The president's refusal to show leadership on GLTB issues, after his clear and consistent promises on the campaign trail, are striking at the heart of his own credibility. Tomorrow a decorated Iraq veteran will be drummed out of the military for a policy (DADT) that Obama laments and also defends.

He need's to make his mind up.

This is not 1993 under Bill Clinton. We're in a new moment that ex-Clinton staffers still running the show in DC are either too old or too out of touch to grasp.

If Obama throws the gays, one of his most ardent bases, under the bus for political expedience, I predict, ironically enough, that his refusal to fight for the civil rights of GLTB Americans will be one of the factors that define his presidency.

It's too bad his handlers can't see it yet.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

05:14 AM on 06/30/2009

At this point in time, the President has been consistent about his plan to repeal DADT and has stated his strategy to do so.

But only 5 months have passed.

Right now, DADT is the law. it is the responsibility of DOJ to defend it. But goodhearted people can lament it, as well.

Let's lobby Congress to get this abhorrent law off the books. Once it is gone, there is no need to defend it.

[Charmed]

07:28 AM on 06/30/2009

tishimself.....black people swear up and down they are his most ardent bases, then hispanics swear they are his most adament bases, then the labor union swears up and down they are his ardament bases. I would rather he lose his next election than to have to keep putting up with this constant whining no matter how many times he says he's working on it.