Meet the Obamas
[Guest post by DRJ]
It turns out the partycrashers at the recent White House State Dinner aren’t the first couple to unexpectedly Meet the Obamas:
“The improbable adventure of Harvey and Paula Darden, Obama supporters from Georgia, took place on Veterans Day, two weeks before Virginia socialites Tareq and Michaele Salahi infamously crashed the Obamas’ state dinner for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
The Dardens mistakenly showed up a day early for a tour scheduled through their congressman.
The White House and Secret Service both said the Dardens went through the appropriate security screenings and were allowed into [a Veteran’s Day] breakfast as a courtesy because there were no public tours the day they arrived.”
Showing up a day early got them a tour with perks? This isn’t my idea of how White House security should work:
“That explanation was news to Harvey Darden, 67, a retired pharmacist, who said he and his wife never were told about the breakfast. They thought they were simply starting their tour until they were ushered into the East Room, offered a buffet spread and told they would be meeting the president.
“The further we got into the White House, the more surprised we were,” Darden told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. “My wife looked at me, and I looked at her, and I said, `You know, I don’t know if we’re in the right place.'”
They approached a White House aide with their concern that they had veered off course but were told to “just go with the flow,” Darden said.
“I felt kind of funny because I was the only man in the room that wasn’t dressed in a coat and tie,” he said. “I was just a plain tourist.”
It turned out the breakfast was an event for veterans and when Darden told a White House aide he is a Navy veteran, they were asked to stay. That’s a nice gesture but a stupid decision. The White House isn’t the place to let public tour visitors show up a day early and sit a spell.
— DRJ
I dunno, DRJ. Anybody that knocks on my door with friendly intentions will find hospitality and something to eat and drink.
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:39 pmAs a Navy veteran, I think they made the right decision to extend some hospitality to veteran on Veterans Day.
Largebill (1d1579) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:41 pmYou never know who may come visiting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baucis_and_Philemon
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:44 pmIn Greek, “xenos” means both stranger and guest.
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:46 pmYeah, not great for security concerns but this seems like small potatoes. Obviously the White House is in charge of taking care of the President, so if they know what’s up and still say it’s ok, I’m inclined to defer to them.
Not the hill to fight on.
wt (7153aa) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:51 pm“It turned out the breakfast was an event for veterans and when Darden told a White House aide he is a Navy veteran, they were asked to stay. That’s a nice gesture but a stupid decision. The White House isn’t the place to let public tour visitors show up a day early and sit a spell.”
So you do a nice thing for a Navy Vet, and this is the thanks you get.
imdw (efa369) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:52 pmThere’s a Jewish story, too, about guests at Sodom and Gommorah.
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:52 pmimdw,
I get as cranky as you when my hemmorhoids act up. But with you it’s a chronic condition. Have you discussed surgery with your doctor?
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:55 pmimdw,
I’m concerned about the safety of the President, his family, the White House, and the people who work there. Incidents like this encourage people to just show up and provide ideas to those who don’t have good intentions. That is not a formula for good security.
DRJ (84a0c3) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:56 pm“Yeah, not great for security concerns but this seems like small potatoes. Obviously the White House is in charge of taking care of the President, so if they know what’s up and still say it’s ok, I’m inclined to defer to them.”
People on tours have their backgrounds checked. If he’s on a tour the next day, he may have already been screened like that. This makes it a bit different than the crashers.
imdw (c5488f) — 12/15/2009 @ 7:58 pmwhen Darden told a White House aide he is a Navy veteran, they were asked to stay
— Did they confirm that fact? or did they just take his word for it? Did they consider the possibility that some (many) vets don’t particularly like the president very much? or that an older vet with a grudge might feel that he has nothing to lose by taking a drastic action?
Icy Texan (fa42ba) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:00 pmYeah, but not NEARLY as closely as someone who’s going to be within arm’s reach of the Leader of the Free World.
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:04 pmWhen the Dardens reached the checkpoint, they said they were told their names were not on the list and were asked to present photo identifications and other information.
After waiting for agents to check their information, they were allowed in and directed into the East Room, where about 200 people were gathered for the breakfast.
Dana (e9ba20) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:04 pmI don’t get what else would be the point if the guest people don’t get copies.
happyfeet (2c63dd) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:05 pm“Yeah, but not NEARLY as closely as someone who’s going to be within arm’s reach of the Leader of the Free World.”
What’s the difference in the background check procedure?
imdw (efa369) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:08 pm“Yes, the names match their SSNs. They do not appear to have any felonies on their record. They have no known warrants out in their names. Their names and/or SSNs do not appear on any watch list. Clear them to enter.”
Who wants to point out the places where horrible errors could creep into that process?
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:09 pmZOMG they’re identity thieves! call the FreeCreditReport.com band!
imdw (efa369) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:12 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be6r4ySlNjk
The bread is on the table
The water is in the pitcher
The pitcher is on the doorstep
Give it to Christ to drink.
Give it, my love, to the passerby
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:12 pmTo Christ and the thief.
“you do a nice thing for a Navy Vet”
I think it’s Obama’s obligation, part of his job we pay him for, to perform honor activities for the military. This is only a general thing, but when Obama has lunch with vets, I don’t see that as a favor or a credit… he’s on the clock.
I’ve been on that kind of tour, and you only show your driver’s license to get in. They compare your name to a piece of paper. They didn’t even know what state my DL was supposed to be from (surprising to me, since I was sponsored by my House rep). Ordinarily, I wouldn’t speak of such concerns. But DRJ’s right… this inspires nuts to actually give it a shot. It seems more feasible than it did when W was president. The aura of perfect security is a valuable deterrent.
Obama and his family must be kept safe as they inspire so much bad blood. It would be terrible, for the right and the left, for his presidency to end this way.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:13 pmAs discussed earlier on the previous crashers threads, there are people in this world who can kill you with their bare hands, or a pen or a pencil. I am not a fan of Barry’s but he is the President for goodness sake! In caves across the Middle East I get the feeling that terrorists are shaving their beards and practising drinking tea with their pinkies fully extended…If we make it that easy, so will they.
Gazzer (1e0374) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:18 pmAlso, the whole background check thingy pre-supposes that a would be assassin would have prior form. We live in strange times and every nutter has to start somewhere. Sadly, I feel the WH is playing games here in order to diminish the import of the earlier security lapses. “We always do this kind of thing…”
It was a nice gesture on part of the White House to a veteran and very Presidential. Meanwhile, this criticism strikes me as petty.
HowdySir (73bbf1) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:18 pmimdw seems to be of the mindset that “nothing bad heppened, therefore nothing bad could have happened, therefore this is much ado about nothing”.
Do you know what some people call that? A test run.
Icy Texan (fa42ba) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:20 pm“As discussed earlier on the previous crashers threads, there are people in this world who can kill you with their bare hands, or a pen or a pencil.”
Some of them are veterans.
“I’ve been on that kind of tour, and you only show your driver’s license to get in.”
Did you ever find Isaac’s name on the letter?
imdw (9af31a) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:24 pmSwing and a miss.
Care to try again?
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:26 pmSome are indeed veterans, some are not. It is important that we find out before rather than after the “event” don’t you think, imdw? Or do you even think at all?
Gazzer (1e0374) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:35 pmWhen has Obama done anything with the military that hasn’t been a photo op?
daleyrocks (718861) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:35 pmHey, IT, I think you give imdw too much credit. He is aaaaalllll about the trolling and snark.
By the way, do you think “imdw” is an acronym, and if so, for what do the initials stand?
Eric Blair (ddbceb) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:36 pmAre you allowed to shoot thread-jackers in the back with an arrow?
Icy Texan (fa42ba) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:36 pmimdw thinks that Navy Veterans having lunch with the US President is akin to poor security, because many sailors and marines are martial artists?
What a stupid idea. Almost as stupid as saying someone’s dumb scrawl on a .pdf after attempting to black out all typed names (and pleading repeatedly in court not to disclose his name, and an attorney being cited for contempt for refusing to disclose the name of the liar) is somehow proof this kid didn’t mind us knowing his name. This person, whose projects include demanding Facebook give him a ‘dislike’ option for comments, is pure rage. His interests include pizza hut and child rape fantasies.
What’s your name, imdw? I would bet a lot that you are not willing to stand behind what you’re saying either.
What’s sickening is that this Isaac Eiland Hall, child rape fetishist, would be admitted into the White House. They wouldn’t even know about his crazed lawsuit failures (yep, he lost his lawsuit claim of remaining anonymous). People that sick are often not clearly on the left or right. they are in that Tim Mcveigh zone where they like Saddam and hate Reno and Reagan.
I don’t mind if Isaac gets to see the presidential portraits and the blue room. I just don’t want such people having lunch with my president. I mean, imagine the bill for feeding this guy lunch.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:38 pmThe point is, imdw, this administration has shoddy security. It doesn’t matter what didn’t happen, what matters – or is supposed to – is what might happen.
Security is to continually be anticipating potentially dangerous situations and scenarios, and plan accordingly to minimize, if not negating them entirely.
At the very least, those measures would include confirming someone is even on the guest list.
Dana (e9ba20) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:39 pmGood looking Dana, click on my signature for recipes for a couple of Greek dishes.
And no, I am not trying to seduce anyone. Just feed them.
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:55 pmScroll down one post.
nk (df76d4) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:56 pmNo, the point is that the methods likely available are prone to errors. This isn’t an Obama Admin issue, it is a security-as-a-whole issue.
I will go point by point.
Yes, the names match their SSNs. – I said imdw missed, but only because he focused on one issue,and because he was being facetious. Identity Theft is not difficult, and it would be very easy for someone determined enough to harm the President to use it. Fingerprinting would help double-check this, but that takes a lot of time, requires a real-live-person verify the match (a computer-generated match is never the final step, there is always a check by a human being), but if the person who’s ID you stole doesn’t have an FBI file (with a print card included) that is right on hand to check, that won’t fix this error.
For the rest, we’ll just assume that Identity Theft is not an issue.
They do not appear to have any felonies on their record. – Awesome. Gacy and Bundy didn’t either until they got arrested, and they were hardly people I would want near any President, no matter what I thought about them.
They have no known warrants out in their names. – Again, unless you’ve been caught, this won’t catch you either. For instance, if you were intent on causing hard to the President, would you send the fanatic with a record, or the fanatic who didn’t even have a speeding ticket?
Their names and/or SSNs do not appear on any watch list. – Well thank Jesus their last name wasn’t Smith or something. Those lists are a damned joke. Again, if you were going to do something violent, I’d think you would make sure to be off such things.
People who want to attack a President do so knowing that it is very unlikely that they will survive. Even at the lunch, there were likely at least five Secret Service Agents close by. You attack, they kill you or take you to the ground. Either way, you acted first.
And that, kids, is why these “checks” are BS, and one of these days they are going to get somebody hurt.
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:58 pmOf course, this is not necessarily Obama’s fault. While everything in the exec branch is his fault, he shouldn’t have to manage this kind of detail no matter how competent or absentee this man is.
Whoever runs the Secret Service needs to be replaced, if only to signify that this is completely unacceptable. I’m glad to have learned that Obama isn’t being more threatened than Bush (I had been told that by the TV at some point), but he’s the first black president. We’re fighting Al Qaida. The economy is in the gutter. Someone out there really will try to kill him. It’s hard to say if we should hear about these breaches, to encourage reform, of if they shouldn’t be out there to shatter the aura of security.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:58 pmNumber one reason for strict WH security…Pres. Joe Biden. Aren’t we in enough trouble as it is?
Gazzer (1e0374) — 12/15/2009 @ 8:59 pm“This isn’t an Obama Admin issue”
Welllllll, Dana probably holds the Administration responsible for this problem. I’m not sure why this wasn’t happening under Bush or if it was just a hush hush thing. I thought, with the NBC stunt, that this was a choreographed stunt with the knowledge of the White House’s social secretary. That’s better than the official story, to me.
but it’s not like Scott’s problems haven’t been around for a while, if Bush also met with these people. If all they got was an east wing tour, then I don’t think that’s a major security threat.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:01 pm“Pres. Joe Biden”
Would manage the senate a lot better and probably has some kind of morality from what I’ve seen. I think he’s a pompous buffoon, but if there was an election between Biden and Obama, before you emigrated, what would you vote?
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:03 pm“It is important that we find out before rather than after the “event” don’t you think, imdw?”
Indeed I think in this case they found out before. Now, do folks think it is a problem for the president to drop in on a tour? Like if the guy had arrived on time the next day and the president had gone and met the tour?
“imdw thinks that Navy Veterans having lunch with the US President is akin to poor security, because many sailors and marines are martial artists?”
I’m not the one that thinks this is poor security. That’s DRJ.
“saying someone’s dumb scrawl on a .pdf after attempting to black out all typed names (”
Really? Did you notice the letterhead on the letter? The letterhead? And his signature? What are you man?
imdw (017d51) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:06 pmComment by Scott Jacobs — 12/15/2009 @ 8:58 pm
Then, preventative measures that should be instituted?
nk, I read it. Certainly there can be no doubt your family adores it when you prepare the meals!
Dana (e9ba20) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:07 pmI would vote “present”.
Icy Texan (fa42ba) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:08 pmimdw, it’s not your fault the threads were jacked. It’s mine. You attempted to make your point that people who say the wrong stuff about democrats will get libeled and see you distort the 1st Amendment to justify destroying it. I know you think being outrageous and irritating is an accomplishment. But I don’t mind this example of it all that much.
More annoying is that you think Navy Veterans having lunch with the president is relevant to a discussion of people hurting the president. I bet these vets were vetted a lot more than the sudden guests, but your attempt to change what you said is pretty pathetic. You’re just like your fat hero… you don’t want to stand behind what you said. I see you blame DRJ for this comparison. Presidents can get killed. It takes a lot of balls for Obama to be willing to be president when you think about all the threats he has to face.
I am not concerned with blaming political factions for his shit security. It needs to be improved if there are plausible ways for people to kill him.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:17 pmEasy. If you aren’t on the list, tough titties, kitty.
The check for a tour of the White House is minimal at best – after all, a lot of people get to go on tours arranged by their congress-person, so the checks are very basic. For that purpose, it is sufficient, because it is very, very unlikely that they will see the President, let alone get close enough to shake his hand (maybe they’ll see him through a window, but those things ain’t your standard double-hung from Builder’s Square).
For a face-to-face, the FBI and Secret Service need at least 24 hours, preferably more, to do a deeper check. Here’s why:
I was in a courthouse once, and the local prosecutor came up to me and said “Scott Jacobs? This is your first DUI, right?”
Problem was, it wasn’t. It was my second. his basic search failed to turn up my first DUI. I could have lied and said “Yup! Sure is!”, and maybe, MAYBE not gotten caught until it was too late (if there is such a thing). Maybe they would have given me a suspended sentence, and moved along. So long as I wasn’t ever asked while under oath what number DUI it was, who knows? nk maybe does, but at the time, I figured it would be best if I owned up. Them finding out later-but-not-too-late would have not ended well for me, I’m quite certain.
Quick checks lead to errors. Maybe someone entered the conviction wrong into the system, and instead of “manufacture of explosive devices” it pops up as “selling kittens without a license”. maybe there’s a back-log at the court-house, and the information isn’t in the system yet. Maybe it got lost and it will NEVER get into the system.
Giving the Secret Service time to check them out more carefully allows for more detailed searches to be done, and for calls to be made, and for this to get caught.
So, shorter me: “No one gets in to see the president without have passed a detailed background-check. No check is considered to be detailed if the people doing the check do not eat three meals between the time the check starts and when it is concluded.”
Scott Jacobs (d027b8) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:38 pm
Icy Texan (fa42ba) — 12/15/2009 @ 9:46 pmimmature monkey dung-walloweri manufacture doody-wiches
insane misguided democratic weasel
I Masturbate to Debra Winger
“——————–” Dennis Weaver
I’m a Major Drool Wellspring
In-a-Mada-Da-Wida baby; don’t you know that I lo-ove you-u
In case of Mania, Definitely Waylay
I sooooo denounce myself
“More annoying is that you think Navy Veterans having lunch with the president is relevant to a discussion of people hurting the president”
This is what happened here. That’s what’s got DRJ so worked up. Go read some letterhead.
“Giving the Secret Service time to check them out more carefully allows for more detailed searches to be done, and for calls to be made, and for this to get caught.”
People doing tours, like this couple was scheduled to do the next day, have to some months in advance. I don’t know if they’re only checked on the day of, but it may be the case that a check had already been done on these folks by the time they got there a day early. But they did have time to check them, and eat a few meals.
imdw (f8211e) — 12/15/2009 @ 10:58 pmhave to *apply* some months in advance.
imdw (c3c479) — 12/15/2009 @ 11:00 pmYeah, this is how IMDW justifies slurring our veterans. the fact that some were near the president when his security sucks, it’s OK, because, according to IMDW, security sucks whenever the veterans are there.
LOL. You hate our veterans because you hate a world where people have honor to them. You’ve shown your hatred of our constitutional protection of free speech in your effort to rip down people for merely criticizing The One. The Navy veterans swore to an opposite world view.
You say people have to apply months in advance to do these tours. That’s untrue. Of course, you probably actually know that and are desperately trying to throw as many things you know will be corrected, so that you get as many responses as possible. Congratulations.
Also, consider why someone might want you to keep bringing up that lawsuit. You’ve brought it up over a dozen times because you think it’s really irritating or because you’re irritated? Do you think I don’t want people to learn about this story? Why would you care so much about an Obama critic’s reputation being libeled more? It must really burn you bad that Obama keeps losing his staff when Beck reports on them for you to think this is worth your time. Why do you compare veterans with threats to our country? The SS has combat training too… you clearly meant these people were disloyal and dangerous.
When you’re done drying your mouth off from practice spitting on my brothers, maybe you can explain yourself and tell me your name (since you say there’s no reason not to link your name to these comments you have repeated). Let me guess, you value your anonymity.
Dustin (44f8cb) — 12/15/2009 @ 11:14 pmNext thing you know that feller that got elected will be hanging out along the street shaking hands and shit! You with the possibility of touching the general public and all.
This shit has got to stop!
Good GAWD he might actually begin to think that he is not alone in the world and therefore the greatest thing since sliced bread!
NAW, not a chance of that ever happening.
TC (0b9ca4) — 12/16/2009 @ 1:30 am“You say people have to apply months in advance to do these tours. That’s untrue”
This is not the only source I’ve found:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/tours-and-events
“Tours are scheduled on a first come, first served basis. Requests can be submitted up to six months in advance and no less than 30 days in advance. You are encouraged to submit your request as early as possible since a limited number of tours are available. ”
So at least a month, and probably more — if you assume that people applied ahead of you and the tours that are a month away are filled.
“Also, consider why someone might want you to keep bringing up that lawsuit.”
Right now I’m just wondering if you noticed the letterhead on the letter.
“When you’re done drying your mouth off from practice spitting on my brothers, maybe you can explain yourself and tell me your name (since you say there’s no reason not to link your name to these comments you have repeated). Let me guess, you value your anonymity.”
Just a few threads over people are talking about tearing ACLs and breaking ankles. That’s not a game I play.
imdw (803b85) — 12/16/2009 @ 4:54 amYou can criticize them, but I’d bet this has happened before with previous administrations, and more than once or twice. Personally I can’t be too harsh on the WH staff and SS. They always have a lot to juggle, and mistakes are inevitible. Frankly, having seen how much they have to do and how much they have to coordinate every day, I’m always amazed it goes as well as it does.
JEA (0ccd61) — 12/16/2009 @ 5:10 amSounds to me like somebody did a decent thing for a couple of older folks. No harm, no foul. In fact, something actually good, so hard to see the foul.
Bill Roper (0283e2) — 12/16/2009 @ 8:12 amThe White House isn’t the place to let public tour visitors show up a day early and sit a spell.
If only it was.
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 12/16/2009 @ 8:39 am