but the whole “...I am in control here”
stank to high heaven of coup d'etat.
poor choice of words I suspect....but maybe not. I don't know.
It was a poor choice of words in the immediate aftermath of an attempted assassination of the President. People under extreme pressure (yes, even government officials) sometimes react awkwardly in such situations.
IMO, it was the press who blew this WAY out of proportion, and the suckers in the American public bought it.
I don’t think it was a ‘power grab’ of any sort. Haig was a true patriot and, despite his gaffe, knew how our system of government worked.
Give the guy a break. He served well. RIP, General Haig.
I was working at CNN at the time and actually took in feed of
presser. He was not staging a coup.
I remember watching this live. He stepped out into the press room to deliver the news about Reagan’s shooting. Chaos and shouts of questions erupted. He was trying to calm things down IN THAT ROOM. The press was offended that he was trying to settle them down. The quote was twisted into a broad statement as though he was overthowing the presidency. As I watched it live, I was amazed how fast the press turned against him. He was trying to maintain calm in the storm of chaos in that room.
Post 21
So, in your view someone entering a situation room and say “I am in control here” or “I am in charge” is taking over the entire operation, in lieu of that part of it. What words would you deem appropriate for that particular situation?
Perhaps you should have gone directly to the last part of your last sentence.
I’m with you, here.
The press cannot be blamed for what came from his own mouth, with no prompting.
While I am sure that he was a genuine patriot and hero in so many ways, and he deserves credit for those things...that moment was quite unfortunate.
But hey, we should get used to people claiming authority when they have no business doing so. We should also get used to having people in the Justice Department who have represented terrorists, trying to kill us. It’s also time for us to get used to taxpayers owning auto companies, banks, insurance companies...just like Mussolini. We should get used to bat-shit crazy Safe Schools Czars. In fact, we should get used to czars in general, despite this being a Republic.
The first president I ever voted for, and for me, the only real president in my lifetime....must be rolling over in his grave.
Not at all.
From Wiki:
Reagan assassination attempt
Secretary of State Haig speaks to the press after the attempted assassination on President Ronald Reagan
In 1981, after the March 30 assassination attempt on Reagan, Haig asserted before reporters “I am in control here” as a result of Reagan’s hospitalization.
Constitutionally, gentlemen, you have the President, the Vice President and the Secretary of State in that order, and should the President decide he wants to transfer the helm to the Vice President, he will do so. He has not done that. As of now, I am in control here, in the White House, pending return of the Vice President and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.
—Alexander Haig , Alexander Haig, autobiographical profile in TIME Magazine, April 2, 1984[13]
It was assumed by many who heard this that Secretary Haig had an antiquated familiarity with the order of succession to the presidency. Rather than being seen as an attempt to allay the nation’s fear, the quotation became seen as a laughable attempt by Haig to exceed his authority.[14]
Haig would have been incorrect if this were an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution concerning both the presidential line of succession and the 25th Amendment, which dictates what happens when a president is incapacitated. The holders of the two offices between the Vice President and the Secretary of State, the Speaker of the House (at the time, Tip O’Neill) and the President pro tempore of the Senate (at the time, J. Strom Thurmond), would be required under U.S. law (3 U.S.C. § 19) to resign their positions in order for either of them to become acting President. This was an unlikely event considering that Vice-President Bush was merely not immediately available. Haig’s statement reflected political reality, if not necessarily legal reality. Haig later said,
I wasn’t talking about transition. I was talking about the executive branch, who is running the government. That was the question asked. It was not, “Who is in line should the President die?”
—Alexander Haig, Alexander Haig interview with 60 Minutes II April 23, 2001
[edit]
I believe it was more a case of trying to calm the public.
You have no idea what you're talking about. The man made a poor choice of words while under pressure.
Put your tinfoil hat away and read about that day in 1981.
So I’ve a personal story about the infamous “I am in control here” anecdote.
First, when Haig and Nixon, et al, were in their hayday, I was a pretty young liberal lass, subject to Walter Conkrite’s nightly news and how the Dems were, even then, hysterics without an ounce of honesty in the party.
But hey, I bought into it, voted for Mcgovern, had a bumper sticker on my Ford Maverick that said “Don’t Blame Me, I didn’t vote for him”....re Nixon.
I was like a lot of libs today, living my life more interested in men who were interested in me than in any sort of political stuff going on out there. By me, Nixon was the incarnate of evil and Reagan? Well I did come to hate Jimmy Carter what with my house coming to worth nothing, my job going down the tubes...in short, then experiencing life as the libs would have us live and not liking it at all.
So I voted for Reagan but I held my nose, my pretty liberal lass self. Anything but Carter.
So this morn I heard the lady on Fox who I think was Haig’s personal assistant or whatever they were called back then. She was honest, firm...I trusted her take on things. She said that as regards Haig’s infamous remark about being in charge after Reagan got shot, that it was said when the man was discombubulated, disoriented, shocked, shaken that the president he served had been shot.
I am cooking so I thought to myself...well Haig must have said he was in charge after Reagan got shot and probably some folks in the room got in a snit and it sounds to me like it was likely blown way out of proportion.
I’m older now, of course, and much wiser. I know now how the Dems loved to make enemies out of people and this Haig remark was ammunition a plenty. Seems to me Haig wasn’t thinking straight when he said it.
At least that was my take in my busy mental synopsis.
Shortly after, husband, he too a former lib although we now are both conservatives having had life hit us in the face and stuff. He has a smirky tone to his voice. “Haig told all the people in the room that he was in charge now,” husband said and I launched into my summary of events as so recently recounted this morn.
“Billy,” I said to get his attention. I then told him of the recent interview I’d heard from Haig’s secretary, her description of how it came down.
“I’d never heard that quote before,” I said, “but it sounds like something Haig said that came off as arrogant and offensive to folks in the room.”
“It sure was,” husband said. “Kissinger was in there, Bush...the VP who WAS in charge I think. It’s all I know about Haig is that quote.”
Heh. Well hey, the lamestream of its day sure did its job, huh? Husband was a young liberal lad during that era, he didn’t especially like Reagan either. All he knows about Haig is that quote.
Now I understand that Haig’s secretary is probably prejudiced but I’ve got a clue now. I tend to give her the benefit of the doubt. She said that Haig was an abrupt fellow, not the most diplomatic of gentlmen. Her summary had the ring of truth, of thoughtful insight.
Anyway, that’s the story of all I learned today about that Haig quote and somewhere there’s a lesson of how much damage the media can do if of a dedicated mind.
After I told husband all I’d heard, he shook his head ruefully. He said maybe Nixon wasn’t so bad a guy but he had a lot of head problems. He agreed that likely the media overplayed the whole Watergate thing.
Just two aging former liberals, trying to figure it all out.
Bravo Sierra! Only to the idiotic media! Any rational person watching the event knew full well that he was referring to the immediate situation at THAT location! There was NO hint of usurping presidential succession!
stank to high heaven of coup d'etat.
poor choice of words I suspect....but maybe not. I don't know.
I don't think you are defending the press, but it does seem that you have bought into the spin that they always use to destroy a person with whom they dislike. General Haig was simply doing what Generals do. He tried to reassure a stunned American public that things were under control and not to panic. Unfortunately he was a General with a "stiff personality" - not a politician who knows how to sneak around problems. The liberal gas bags in the media have no understanding of Generals, but they do know how to slander political weaknesses. This was a complete "non issue" spoken by a person with zero personality, and the liberal press ran with it like Lucifer was coming to town.
His foolish remark is not nearly as stupid as yours. He misspoke. You are just a fool.
Not hardly. Here's what he said:
"...Constitutionally, gentlemen, you have the President, the Vice President and the Secretary of State in that order, and should the President decide he wants to transfer the helm to the Vice President, he will do so. He has not done that. As of now, I am in control here, in the White House, pending return of the Vice President and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course..."
The President was still the President at that point, Haig was just running the daily operation at the WH.
The Lib press has taken this and distorted it just as they always do.
For god sake, there was an assassination attempt. At that time it was not known if foreign governments were behind it. It was an appropriate message to our enemies. Unless of course you are the enemy.
Oh jeez. Give it a break.
It's what Generals do.
stank to high heaven of coup d'etat
You are so wrong.
The statement indicated the line of succession from vice-president onward. Haig limited his control to what was happening at that moment at the White House. He followed up by saying that he was in touch with the Vice President and if anything should happen he would act in concert with the Vice President.
There was no hint of a coup d'etat. What there was was deliberate press manipulation of the facts.
Um, no. It was a response to question, in a crisis moment.