A proud member of the reality-based community
This site is a member of WebRing. To browse visit here. Monday, February 09, 2004 A few comments on George Bush's appearance on Meet the Press Sunday morning (the full transcript is at MSNBC's Meet the Press site). I had wondered whether Tim Russert would pull his punches. He did ask a series of good, pointed questions, but he dropped the ball every time when Bush answered. Brad Delong has done an excellent job of both dissecting Bush's answers and suggesting additional questions Russert might have asked. Bush has an odd habit of answering a different question than the one he was asked, of revealing information the questioner wasn't trying to elicit. I like to think that his conscience is hiding inside there somewhere and poking him. You just told a real whopper there, Dubya, but you can make it right—tell the nice man what you really plan for the intel commission. Whatever the reason for this strange phenomenon, Russert missed the boat on every one of those instances as well. For example:Russert: On Friday, you announced a committee, commission to look into intelligence failures regarding the Iraq war and our entire intelligence community. You have been reluctant to do that for some time. Why? President Bush: Well, first let me kind of step back and talk about intelligence in general, if I might. Intelligence is a vital part of fighting and winning the war against the terrorists. It is because the war against terrorists is a war against individuals who hide in caves in remote parts of the world, individuals who have these kind of shadowy networks, individuals who deal with rogue nations. So, we need a good intelligence system. We need really good intelligence. So, the commission I set up is to obviously analyze what went right or what went wrong with the Iraqi intelligence. It was kind of lessons learned. But it's really set up to make sure the intelligence services provide as good a product as possible for future presidents as well [italics mine]. This is just a part of analyzing where we are on the war against terror.I'm sure Tim Russert assumed, like the rest of us, that the commission was set up to find out why our intelligence was allegedly so flawed. It probably never occurred to him to ask exactly what the commission would be charged with doing. But now we know. Next excerpt:Russert: There is another commission right now looking into September 11th . . . Will you testify before that commission? President Bush: We have given extraordinary cooperation with Chairmen Kean and Hamilton. As you know, we made an agreement on what's called "Presidential Daily Briefs," and they could see the information the CIA provided me--that is unique, by the way, to have provided what's called the PDB, because-- Russert: Presidential Daily Brief? President Bush: Right. And see, the danger of allowing for information that I get briefed on out in the public arena is that it could mean that the product I receive or future presidents receive is somewhat guarded for fear of--for fear of it being revealed, and for fear of people saying, Well, you know, we?re going to second guess that which you told the President.What George Bush knew in advance of the September 11 attacks is important enough that he shouldn't be trying to make brownie points with the American public by touting his generosity in revealing it. But again, he mentioned something that Tim Russert would probably never have asked about, his concern that the general public might find out what he knew, and that someone might 'second guess' the significance of the information. Russert did comment on the fact that the intelligence commission has been given until April 2005, well after the election, to complete their work and present a report, but failed to add that the 9/11 commission has been told to have its findings completed within three months, a clear impossibility. Kind of makes you think Bush wants to rush one and dawdle on the other. On the economy:Russert: How, why, as a fiscal conservative as you like to call yourself, would you allow a $500 billion deficit and this kind of deficit disaster? President Bush: Sure. The budget I just proposed to the Congress cuts the deficit in half in five years. Now, I don't know what the assumptions are in the GAO report, but I do know that if Congress is wise with the people's money, we can cut the deficit in half. And at that point in time, as a percentage of GDP, the deficit will be relatively low. I agree with the assessment that we've got some long term financial issues we must look at, and that's one reason I asked Congress to deal with Medicare. I strongly felt that if we didn't have an element of competition, that if we weren't modern with the Medicare program, if we didn't incorporate what's called "health savings accounts" to encourage Americans to take more control over their healthcare decisions, we would have even a worse financial picture in the long run. I believe Medicare is going to not only make the system work better for seniors but is going to help the fiscal situation of our long term projection.At first I thought bringing up Medicare was just another little indiscretion. Russert didn't ask about specific cuts. But during the break after this group of questions, NBC ran a lovely little public service announcement in which vibrantly healthy-looking seniors enthused over the fact that 'Medicare wasn't changing, just getting better.' It became obvious that Bush's mention of Medicare was orchestrated to tie in with the PSA. Tim Russert failed to ask why the true anticipated cost of Medicare was kept from our legislators until after the bill was passed, something which has Bush's most conservative supporters up in arms against him. He also apparently didn't hear that last little remark Bush dropped in: "I believe Medicare is going to not only make the system work better for seniors but is going to help the fiscal situation of our long term projection." Er—excuse me? How exactly is the Medicare program going to "help the fiscal situation"? By completely privatizing it? That's the only reason I can think of for Bush's failure to own up to its true projected cost, to be able to say, "Gee, it was nice of you guys to pass this bill, but we just can't afford it after all, and if we get rid of it, look how much better the figures will be!" Bush's response to the question about his military service was one of the most revealing (and perhaps the one he'll most regret providing):Russert: When allegations were made about John McCain or Wesley Clark on their military records, they opened up their entire files. Would you agree to do that? President Bush: Yeah. Listen, these files--I mean, people have been looking for these files for a long period of time, trust me, and starting in the 1994 campaign for governor. And I can assure you in the year 2000 people were looking for those files as well. Probably you were. And--absolutely. I mean, I-- Russert: But you would allow pay stubs, tax records, anything to show that you were serving during that period? President Bush: Yeah. If we still have them, but I--you know, the records are kept in Colorado, as I understand, and they scoured the records. And I'm just telling you, I did my duty, and it's politics, you know, to kind of ascribe all kinds of motives to me. But I have been through it before. I'm used to it. What I don't like is when people say serving in the Guard is ? is ? may not be a true service. Russert: But you authorize the release of everything to settle this? President Bush: Yes, absolutely. We did so in 2000, by the way. Hmm. One promise he may come to regret, and one outright lie. And a couple of possible mis-statements that may also come back to haunt him. " . . . people have been looking for these files for a long period of time, trust me." Did he mean "looking AT these files?" Because the files have been secured in Colorado, as he said, and have most definitely NOT all been released, neither during the Texas governor's campaign nor during the 2000 presidential campaign. So that was, at best, another instance of verbal stumbling, and at worst, an inadvertent admission of the truth. Then he said, " . . . and they SCOURED the records." Did he mean that someone looked at them closely? Or did he mean they were 'cleaned up'? The problem with George W. Bush, the President of the United States, is that you frequently can't tell exactly what he meant when he says almost anything. Finally, if I were Colin Powell, I'd be just a little pissed right now at Bush's not-too-subtle dig about "denigrating the Guard." In Powell's autobiography, he said he was angry that sons of wealthy and powerful families "managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units" in order to avoid going to Vietnam. Maybe Bush should have read "My American Journey" before choosing Colin Powell as a running mate. My opinion is that Powell has boot-licked himself into a position from which only a full-scale offense can save face. I'll be surprised if he lasts much longer, but I'll bet he goes down swinging. I've only touched the high spots here (or were they low spots?). The general consensus amongst the far more knowledgeable people who are commenting on Sunday's interview is that Bush came off very badly with everyone, even his supporters, and that the only kind thing anyone could say about Tim Russert is that he was trying to be respectful to the office of president, if not to the current occupant of the office posted by Liz @ 8:20 PM | The template is set to display 10 posts. To see all the posts for this month, click on the month name in the Archive section RSS Feed PERSONAL Send email toliz at life-as-a-spectator-sport.com Home I'm a mother, grandmother, a computer professional, Democrat, Christian. I welcome politely worded comments and email, my spam filter throws the rest away, so don't bother to flame me WHY 'LIFE AS A SPECTATOR SPORT' "If you're lucky not to live in the gutters of a slum, but still can't afford to take vacations in the Alps, you're part of that enormous middle class who lives life through the medium of the television, further separated from "real" life by air conditioner, by automobile, by dishwasher, microwave and ice-in-the-door refrigerator, by automatic washer and dryer, and all the other appliances and conveniences that make it possible for America to live life at second hand. I'm not sure why Americans decided that televised drama was better than the real thing, that cardboard microwave food containers were an adequate substitute for real dishes, and their contents for real food, or that cooking, dishwashing and face-to-face conversation wasn't worth the effort and time it required. Someone fed this nation a plastic crate of out-of-season tomatoes and told us it was life and we took them at their word, and we're so much the poorer for it that it's hard to know where to start to list the shortcomings." I wrote this a couple of years ago, but I have to admit it's much less amusing than I thought it would be to see the artifical construct falling apart. THE NON-ELECTRIC HOME Cleaning, 1 Cleaning, 2 Cleaning, 3 KNITTING BLOGS Extravayarnza Knitting Heretic Mind of Winter Pie Knits Persistent Illusion See Eunny Knit The Keyboard Biologist Taleweaver's Ramblings TECHnitting Wendy Knits FINISHED PROJECTS -------FINISHED IN 2006------- Peruvian Cap Tutti-Frutti Socks Shelley's Socks Carol's Socks -------FINISHED IN 2007------- Chain Link Socks Baby Surprise Jacket Valerie & Friend Baby Bonnet Rainbow Baby Socks Girls Pixie Hood Mitred Square Heart Red & White Socks Coffee Cup Pot Holder Nubbins Dishcloth Garterlac Dishcloth Suede Booties Kate's Socks Norwegian Sweet Baby Cap Half Thumbless Mittens Red Mittens for Akkol -------FINISHED IN 2008------- SELF-RELIANCE AND THE FUTURE -- Blogs and websites -- Causubon's Book Club Orlov Food Storage Made Easy From the Wilderness In the Wake Listening to Katrina Survival Topics The Modern Homestead The Oil Drum Notes from a Hillside Farm -- Mailing Lists -- 12vdc Power Living on the Land Rainwater Refrigeration Alternatives Old Ways of Living POLITICAL BLOGS and SITES The political sites have moved BOOKS I'M READING How to Grow More Vegetables, etc. Small Scale Grain Raising ARCHIVES February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 August 2008 July 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002 Feedjit Live Blog Stats
A few comments on George Bush's appearance on Meet the Press Sunday morning (the full transcript is at MSNBC's Meet the Press site). I had wondered whether Tim Russert would pull his punches. He did ask a series of good, pointed questions, but he dropped the ball every time when Bush answered. Brad Delong has done an excellent job of both dissecting Bush's answers and suggesting additional questions Russert might have asked. Bush has an odd habit of answering a different question than the one he was asked, of revealing information the questioner wasn't trying to elicit. I like to think that his conscience is hiding inside there somewhere and poking him. You just told a real whopper there, Dubya, but you can make it right—tell the nice man what you really plan for the intel commission. Whatever the reason for this strange phenomenon, Russert missed the boat on every one of those instances as well. For example:Russert: On Friday, you announced a committee, commission to look into intelligence failures regarding the Iraq war and our entire intelligence community. You have been reluctant to do that for some time. Why? President Bush: Well, first let me kind of step back and talk about intelligence in general, if I might. Intelligence is a vital part of fighting and winning the war against the terrorists. It is because the war against terrorists is a war against individuals who hide in caves in remote parts of the world, individuals who have these kind of shadowy networks, individuals who deal with rogue nations. So, we need a good intelligence system. We need really good intelligence. So, the commission I set up is to obviously analyze what went right or what went wrong with the Iraqi intelligence. It was kind of lessons learned. But it's really set up to make sure the intelligence services provide as good a product as possible for future presidents as well [italics mine]. This is just a part of analyzing where we are on the war against terror.I'm sure Tim Russert assumed, like the rest of us, that the commission was set up to find out why our intelligence was allegedly so flawed. It probably never occurred to him to ask exactly what the commission would be charged with doing. But now we know. Next excerpt:Russert: There is another commission right now looking into September 11th . . . Will you testify before that commission? President Bush: We have given extraordinary cooperation with Chairmen Kean and Hamilton. As you know, we made an agreement on what's called "Presidential Daily Briefs," and they could see the information the CIA provided me--that is unique, by the way, to have provided what's called the PDB, because-- Russert: Presidential Daily Brief? President Bush: Right. And see, the danger of allowing for information that I get briefed on out in the public arena is that it could mean that the product I receive or future presidents receive is somewhat guarded for fear of--for fear of it being revealed, and for fear of people saying, Well, you know, we?re going to second guess that which you told the President.What George Bush knew in advance of the September 11 attacks is important enough that he shouldn't be trying to make brownie points with the American public by touting his generosity in revealing it. But again, he mentioned something that Tim Russert would probably never have asked about, his concern that the general public might find out what he knew, and that someone might 'second guess' the significance of the information. Russert did comment on the fact that the intelligence commission has been given until April 2005, well after the election, to complete their work and present a report, but failed to add that the 9/11 commission has been told to have its findings completed within three months, a clear impossibility. Kind of makes you think Bush wants to rush one and dawdle on the other. On the economy:Russert: How, why, as a fiscal conservative as you like to call yourself, would you allow a $500 billion deficit and this kind of deficit disaster? President Bush: Sure. The budget I just proposed to the Congress cuts the deficit in half in five years. Now, I don't know what the assumptions are in the GAO report, but I do know that if Congress is wise with the people's money, we can cut the deficit in half. And at that point in time, as a percentage of GDP, the deficit will be relatively low. I agree with the assessment that we've got some long term financial issues we must look at, and that's one reason I asked Congress to deal with Medicare. I strongly felt that if we didn't have an element of competition, that if we weren't modern with the Medicare program, if we didn't incorporate what's called "health savings accounts" to encourage Americans to take more control over their healthcare decisions, we would have even a worse financial picture in the long run. I believe Medicare is going to not only make the system work better for seniors but is going to help the fiscal situation of our long term projection.At first I thought bringing up Medicare was just another little indiscretion. Russert didn't ask about specific cuts. But during the break after this group of questions, NBC ran a lovely little public service announcement in which vibrantly healthy-looking seniors enthused over the fact that 'Medicare wasn't changing, just getting better.' It became obvious that Bush's mention of Medicare was orchestrated to tie in with the PSA. Tim Russert failed to ask why the true anticipated cost of Medicare was kept from our legislators until after the bill was passed, something which has Bush's most conservative supporters up in arms against him. He also apparently didn't hear that last little remark Bush dropped in: "I believe Medicare is going to not only make the system work better for seniors but is going to help the fiscal situation of our long term projection." Er—excuse me? How exactly is the Medicare program going to "help the fiscal situation"? By completely privatizing it? That's the only reason I can think of for Bush's failure to own up to its true projected cost, to be able to say, "Gee, it was nice of you guys to pass this bill, but we just can't afford it after all, and if we get rid of it, look how much better the figures will be!" Bush's response to the question about his military service was one of the most revealing (and perhaps the one he'll most regret providing):Russert: When allegations were made about John McCain or Wesley Clark on their military records, they opened up their entire files. Would you agree to do that? President Bush: Yeah. Listen, these files--I mean, people have been looking for these files for a long period of time, trust me, and starting in the 1994 campaign for governor. And I can assure you in the year 2000 people were looking for those files as well. Probably you were. And--absolutely. I mean, I-- Russert: But you would allow pay stubs, tax records, anything to show that you were serving during that period? President Bush: Yeah. If we still have them, but I--you know, the records are kept in Colorado, as I understand, and they scoured the records. And I'm just telling you, I did my duty, and it's politics, you know, to kind of ascribe all kinds of motives to me. But I have been through it before. I'm used to it. What I don't like is when people say serving in the Guard is ? is ? may not be a true service. Russert: But you authorize the release of everything to settle this? President Bush: Yes, absolutely. We did so in 2000, by the way. Hmm. One promise he may come to regret, and one outright lie. And a couple of possible mis-statements that may also come back to haunt him. " . . . people have been looking for these files for a long period of time, trust me." Did he mean "looking AT these files?" Because the files have been secured in Colorado, as he said, and have most definitely NOT all been released, neither during the Texas governor's campaign nor during the 2000 presidential campaign. So that was, at best, another instance of verbal stumbling, and at worst, an inadvertent admission of the truth. Then he said, " . . . and they SCOURED the records." Did he mean that someone looked at them closely? Or did he mean they were 'cleaned up'? The problem with George W. Bush, the President of the United States, is that you frequently can't tell exactly what he meant when he says almost anything. Finally, if I were Colin Powell, I'd be just a little pissed right now at Bush's not-too-subtle dig about "denigrating the Guard." In Powell's autobiography, he said he was angry that sons of wealthy and powerful families "managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units" in order to avoid going to Vietnam. Maybe Bush should have read "My American Journey" before choosing Colin Powell as a running mate. My opinion is that Powell has boot-licked himself into a position from which only a full-scale offense can save face. I'll be surprised if he lasts much longer, but I'll bet he goes down swinging. I've only touched the high spots here (or were they low spots?). The general consensus amongst the far more knowledgeable people who are commenting on Sunday's interview is that Bush came off very badly with everyone, even his supporters, and that the only kind thing anyone could say about Tim Russert is that he was trying to be respectful to the office of president, if not to the current occupant of the office
Russert: On Friday, you announced a committee, commission to look into intelligence failures regarding the Iraq war and our entire intelligence community. You have been reluctant to do that for some time. Why? President Bush: Well, first let me kind of step back and talk about intelligence in general, if I might. Intelligence is a vital part of fighting and winning the war against the terrorists. It is because the war against terrorists is a war against individuals who hide in caves in remote parts of the world, individuals who have these kind of shadowy networks, individuals who deal with rogue nations. So, we need a good intelligence system. We need really good intelligence. So, the commission I set up is to obviously analyze what went right or what went wrong with the Iraqi intelligence. It was kind of lessons learned. But it's really set up to make sure the intelligence services provide as good a product as possible for future presidents as well [italics mine]. This is just a part of analyzing where we are on the war against terror.
Russert: There is another commission right now looking into September 11th . . . Will you testify before that commission? President Bush: We have given extraordinary cooperation with Chairmen Kean and Hamilton. As you know, we made an agreement on what's called "Presidential Daily Briefs," and they could see the information the CIA provided me--that is unique, by the way, to have provided what's called the PDB, because-- Russert: Presidential Daily Brief? President Bush: Right. And see, the danger of allowing for information that I get briefed on out in the public arena is that it could mean that the product I receive or future presidents receive is somewhat guarded for fear of--for fear of it being revealed, and for fear of people saying, Well, you know, we?re going to second guess that which you told the President.
Russert: How, why, as a fiscal conservative as you like to call yourself, would you allow a $500 billion deficit and this kind of deficit disaster? President Bush: Sure. The budget I just proposed to the Congress cuts the deficit in half in five years. Now, I don't know what the assumptions are in the GAO report, but I do know that if Congress is wise with the people's money, we can cut the deficit in half. And at that point in time, as a percentage of GDP, the deficit will be relatively low. I agree with the assessment that we've got some long term financial issues we must look at, and that's one reason I asked Congress to deal with Medicare. I strongly felt that if we didn't have an element of competition, that if we weren't modern with the Medicare program, if we didn't incorporate what's called "health savings accounts" to encourage Americans to take more control over their healthcare decisions, we would have even a worse financial picture in the long run. I believe Medicare is going to not only make the system work better for seniors but is going to help the fiscal situation of our long term projection.
Russert: When allegations were made about John McCain or Wesley Clark on their military records, they opened up their entire files. Would you agree to do that? President Bush: Yeah. Listen, these files--I mean, people have been looking for these files for a long period of time, trust me, and starting in the 1994 campaign for governor. And I can assure you in the year 2000 people were looking for those files as well. Probably you were. And--absolutely. I mean, I-- Russert: But you would allow pay stubs, tax records, anything to show that you were serving during that period? President Bush: Yeah. If we still have them, but I--you know, the records are kept in Colorado, as I understand, and they scoured the records. And I'm just telling you, I did my duty, and it's politics, you know, to kind of ascribe all kinds of motives to me. But I have been through it before. I'm used to it. What I don't like is when people say serving in the Guard is ? is ? may not be a true service. Russert: But you authorize the release of everything to settle this? President Bush: Yes, absolutely. We did so in 2000, by the way.
The template is set to display 10 posts. To see all the posts for this month, click on the month name in the Archive section
RSS Feed
PERSONAL
WHY 'LIFE AS A SPECTATOR SPORT'
"If you're lucky not to live in the gutters of a slum, but still can't afford to take vacations in the Alps, you're part of that enormous middle class who lives life through the medium of the television, further separated from "real" life by air conditioner, by automobile, by dishwasher, microwave and ice-in-the-door refrigerator, by automatic washer and dryer, and all the other appliances and conveniences that make it possible for America to live life at second hand. I'm not sure why Americans decided that televised drama was better than the real thing, that cardboard microwave food containers were an adequate substitute for real dishes, and their contents for real food, or that cooking, dishwashing and face-to-face conversation wasn't worth the effort and time it required. Someone fed this nation a plastic crate of out-of-season tomatoes and told us it was life and we took them at their word, and we're so much the poorer for it that it's hard to know where to start to list the shortcomings." I wrote this a couple of years ago, but I have to admit it's much less amusing than I thought it would be to see the artifical construct falling apart.
THE NON-ELECTRIC HOME
Cleaning, 1 Cleaning, 2 Cleaning, 3
KNITTING BLOGS
Extravayarnza Knitting Heretic Mind of Winter Pie Knits Persistent Illusion See Eunny Knit The Keyboard Biologist Taleweaver's Ramblings TECHnitting Wendy Knits
FINISHED PROJECTS
SELF-RELIANCE AND THE FUTURE
POLITICAL BLOGS and SITES
BOOKS I'M READING
How to Grow More Vegetables, etc. Small Scale Grain Raising
ARCHIVES
February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 August 2008 July 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002
Powered by BLOGGER Template made possible by BLOGSKINS.
