BUSH'S PRESS CONFERENCE LAST NIGHT

Nealz Nuze ^ | Wednesday, April 14, 2004 | Neal Boortz

[beaureguard]

President Bush came out swinging last night at his nationally televised press conference, and as usual, the media made a bunch of idiots out of themselves. But that's par for the course, I suppose. Bush began with a 17-minute address to the nation that focused entirely on the situation in Iraq. Throughout the course of his remarks, he shot down just about every argument the Democrats and the media have been making about Iraq. Don't expect to see that analysis in the press reports of his news conference today however.

The president said that the violence in Iraq is neither a civil war, nor an uprising, but rather a power grab by Islamic militants. This fact is clear to anyone who takes a rational view of the situation. So much for the Vietnam comparison. He also stood by the June 30th deadline for handing over power to the Iraqis, much to the consternation of the left and Democrats in Congress. He correctly pointed out that if the Coalition steps back from that pledge, the Iraqis will feel betrayed, something he is not going to let happen. In other words, he wants the word of the United States to actually mean something. Imagine that. If some previous presidents, both Republican and Democrat, had felt the same way we might not be in this fix today.

Then it was send in the clowns time as the media started asking their questions. It wasn't so much a question and answer period as it was an interrogation. First question? How could Bush be so wrong about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and how could he take us to war on false premises? Straight out of the liberal playbook. At the beginning of the war in Iraq John Kerry had the same view on WMDs as did George Bush; ditto for the United Nations and most of Europe. To hear the media tell it there was only one person in the world last March who felt that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of WMDs, and that person was George Bush.

Then, we had the question that Bush would not answer...and it was priceless, because they tried more than once. Does the president feel any personal responsibility for 9/11? The first question that comes to mind is whether or not it is even appropriate for a reporter to demand apologies from the president at a presidential news conference? But ... ask the question they did.

Look ... he didn't do it. They did it. Osama bin Laden and his assortment of Islamic maniacs. The president's job is not to apologize. His job is to react; to pursue the people who did this thing ... and permanently remove them as a threat to our security and interests.

We started this orgy of apologies during the Clintonista era. They are little more than moral exhibitionism. The reason this reporter was pressing Bush for this apology is because he realizes that an apology would be a de facto acceptance of culpability. Maybe Clinton should apologize.

Then someone asked him if he ever admits any mistakes. He couldn't think of any. The liberals in the media must be seething over that one. Then came the question about the PDB, and they couldn't get him on that either. The underlying premise of many of the questions is the standard liberal mantra these days: that President Bush knew about the attacks on 9/11 before they happened and did nothing. To them, it's all a big conspiracy.

Liberals believe in virtually every conspiracy under the sun, except the one true and obvious conspiracy; the media is liberally biased.

Bush was also repeatedly questioned on his "plan" to resolve the situation in Iraq and bring our troops home. What do they want, an hour-by-hour timetable? The plan stands to turn over Iraqi sovereignty to Iraqis on June 30th. American troops will stay to protect against insurrection. Following the transfer of power there will be free elections. What do they expect from Bush, the names of the candidates?

[sarasota]

My favorite Bush comment was near the close when he said that "When I say I am going to do something, I am going to do it". (Paraphrase) Imagine. A President we can count on to keep his word. He's got my vote.

[Two-Bits]

Hi, Please take a moment and either call the President or send an email to let him know we, the American people back him. Also, if you could just tell one person to do the same and ask them to tell another, than God willing, we will flood the switchboard with calls and faxes like they have never seem. This is one way we can take it direct to the President and it can not be misled by the media or stupid polls.....
Please call or email and God bless:
Comments: 202-456-1111 Switchboard: 202-456-1414 FAX: 202-456-2461 E-Mail President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov

[beaureguard]

Mine too!

[MrB]

How about his comment about the UN and Iraq:

"Either you do something about it, or WE WILL."

[sarasota]

I love it! He's the man for this era, no doubt about it. I was especially pleased that the networks (not cable) went back to their regular programming after a few remarks. I think/hope the majority of Americans did the same. W speaks for himself and we don't need the liberal media to tell us what he said.

[OpusatFR]

" Don't expect to see that analysis in the press reports of his news conference today however."

No kidding. There's a piece in the Boston Globe, by Mark Jurkowitz whinning because there is a "credibility gap" perceived by the public in news "journalism".

Of course, he misses the point which is the news media is completely biased and untrustworthy. The agenda is too obvious.

[Ingtar]

On the lack of WMD in Iraq, perhaps we should begin to turn the tables. "I was fooled by the UN reports. Why would they do this, you ask? So that they could continue to skim money off of the oil for food program."

[Quilla]

Thank you for the email links - I just sent a congratulatory note.

My children have our internet connection in the evenings so I didn't freep during the press conference. I couldn't wait to read the live thread to gauge freeper reactions this morning. I agreed with the consensus - the President delivered!

[1Old Pro]

Then it was send in the clowns time as the media started asking their questions.

No kidding. I was amazed how many people noticed this as I listened to my local morning talk radio.

[dd5339]

Give the Whitehouse line a call!

Semper Fi

[SquirrelKing]

On the lack of WMD in Iraq, perhaps we should begin to turn the tables. "I was fooled by the UN reports. Why would they do this, you ask? So that they could continue to skim money off of the oil for food program."

Good.

[MinuteGal]

The President DID deliver many memorable line and zingers last night.

However, from a strictly professional point of view, I truly wish his advisors would tell him to shorten his answers. He appears to have a need to explain everything in detail and he goes on and on. His spates of words dilute the good stuff and cause a drifting of attention.

Plus, the more one goes on, the possibility of getting into trouble increases. Take it from one who delivered many of her own political speeches in her time, plus writing speeches for other politicians as a consultant.

Leni

[mountainfolk]

I noticed that Pres Bush did not take follow-up questions from the reporters. Must be a new rule, and high time imo. The biased, liberal press is making a mockery of presidential news conferences with their inane, self-serving 'questions'. That NPR guy was a real pip--so stupidly ignorant that he couldn't think up a substantive question so reverted to RAT talking points. While there were professional reporters on hand, time was wasted in indulging the socialist, RAT agenda driven, journalist pretenders. I think the liberal press is in more trouble than they want Pres Bush to be. Their credibility is the joke they don't yet get.

[bigjoesaddle]

I have a question and theory, please read and reply.

When did it come out that the "70 ongoing investigations" comment in the daily briefing was not true?

This would explain A LOT why the press were pressing like hell that the President apologize last night at the press conference. This basicly resolves Bush of ALL BLAME FOR 9/11, because how can you have control of a situation if your info on it is crap?

So the press HAD TO GET BUSH TO, IN SOMEWAY, ADMIT HE SCREWED UP! Because this "70" comment will exonerate him of all blame.

[AFPhys]

I wonder if there is any estimate of the number of persons who actually tuned in to the news conference last night.

I would love to see such a stat ASAP.

[joesnuffy]

Unless its adequately funding and directing the Veteran's Medical Centers to expedite their care and treatment of combat vets...

Or close our southern bordesr and stop narco terrorism....the infiltration by 'other' terrorists
and illegal alien drug smugglers

[wayoverontheright]

Then it was send in the clowns time as the media started asking their questions.

It was so obvious that only ONE person in the room was aware of the fact that those who killed our innocents and wish to kill more, were watching and listening. Al-Qaida's Fifth Column within our country was duly identified.

If there's another attack on our soil, possibly the safest place to be is next to one of the reporters in that room.

The reports from the main-stream media will no doubt emphasize Bush's verbal skills, and that's interesting in itself. Quite possibly those on the Left are so used to HIDETHEWEENIESPEAK, a tongue employed ad-nauseum by Democrats, that straight talk is perceived as a foreign language.

[TigersEye]

We started this orgy of apologies during the Clintonista era. They are little more than moral exhibitionism.

Amen! Such moralistic pieties are as phony as a three dollar bill. I'm glad this President is above that.

[jaime1959]

Nice spin, Neal, but Bush's performance during the Q&A period was the worst I've ever seen since the Admiral Stockdale fiasco at the 92 Veep debates. It was excruciatingly painful and embarassing to watch.

Please save the flames. I'll never vote for a Dem, but it's a sad state of affairs when your choices for President are Bush and Kerry. Why can't the Pubs present us with a REAL conservative who can forcefully articulate a position without stepping all over his johnson?