The World Newser is World News' daily blog. Here, you'll find our staff's thoughts on the day's news and the way we build our broadcast. Plus, we'll share reports from our team of correspondents in the field, as well as producers behind-the-scenes.
RECENT POSTS
- Christmas Sales...in July!
- Tim Karcher's Wife: 'Today we can start moving forward again'
- Madoff's Tangled Web Begins to Unravel
- Lance Armstrong to Climb 7,200 Ft. Today
- Obama to Africa: Text Me!
- Uighurs Gather for Muslim Holy Day as Hundreds of Police Stand Guard
- Why Sarah Palin Really Quit Us
- Clem's Chronicles: H1N1 Swine Flu/Buffett on the Economy/Sen. Ensign
- Death of a Salesmen, Almost: Billy Mays Ads Live On
- Eyewitness Inside Tehran Describes Brutal Police Attacks and Shootings
- 'United Breaks Guitars': Hot on YouTube
- 3 Kinds of E. Coli Linked to Nestle's Cookie Dough
WORLD NEWSER CATEGORIES
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Martha Raddatz On New Bush Book: Lame Ducks & Lipstick
September 05, 2008 1:45 PM
ABC's Martha Raddatz from Washington:
President Bush has long said that he will let history be the judge of his presidency. Well, a big page of history will be hitting the bookshelves next week with the release of Bob Woodward's "The War Within."
The Washington Post released some excerpts from the famed Watergate reporter's fourth book on the administration which portrays President Bush as "tentative and slow to react to the escalating violence in Iraq" but standing up to his military advisers when some on his national security team began advocating for a surge. There were tantalizing quotes about a senior commander questioning the president’s "understanding" of the nature of the war, as well as allegations that the administration has been doing extensive spying on the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Malaki. "We know everything he (Malaki) says," Woodward reports he was told.
So with those excerpts in hand I headed into White House Press Secretary Dana Perino’s briefing this morning ready for fireworks. Okay, so questions about the number of troops in Iraq came first, then the economy, and more questions about the economy. I asked the first question about the book, zeroing in on the spying charges, which Perino had clearly come prepared to answer.
"I would just point to the fact that we would not comment on any of the assertions in the book regarding the allegation that you brought up," Perino said confidently. "What I can tell you is we have extensive cooperation with Prime Minister Maliki." She threw in a few lines defending the president, and then answered a brief follow-up, bracing for more. It didn't happen. Perino seemed as surprised as I was. Reporters quickly moved onto Secretary Rice's trip to Libya and the Pakistani elections.
Perhaps it is because Woodward's book was preceded by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan's blockbuster, "What Happened" which asserted that the president and his chief advisers did not hesitate to "spin, hide, shade and exaggerate the truth" when it came to the war in Iraq.
Or perhaps it is because it is not such a huge surprise that the US may be spying on the Iraq government. I figure we're likely spying on everyone in Iraq.
But the most likely reason is that President Bush is a lame duck. Take it from me. The press is paying so little attention to him that he actually looks excited to see us when he ventures out. The briefings are so sparsely attended that practically everyone there could get a front row seat. I spent my first two and a half years covering the Bush presidency filing stories for World News almost every day. But with a riveting election, and a withering economy, the White House just isn't garnering the attention it used to. I can only imagine what the remaining few months will be like.
But here is the problem for me: In terms of television coverage, the only difference between being a lame duck president and covering a lame duck president? Lipstick.
September 5, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (46)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
So now that this "lame duck" has done the dirty work he was installed to do--preside over a false-flag "terror" attack psyop and its cover-up, initiate a condition of endless war (with shifting "enemies") for profit and resource control, normalize outrages against the Constitution, International Law and human decency, etc--there's no need to hold him accountable for his crimes, right, Ms. Raddatz?
He's just a poor, well-meaning "incompetent" who deserves our pity, right?
No need to point out, for example, seven years after the fact, the treasonous failure to defend the US public on 9/11 that justified all this neo-fascism on display in the streets of St. Paul?
No amount of lipstick will conceal the truth of what this administration and its "advisers" have done.
Nor will it hide the complicity of the corporate media.
Posted by: neo | Sep 5, 2008 2:44:53 PM
Ms. Raddatz is far from defending the President. She is merely stating the truth: the media, and I mean all of it, not just the "MSM," has moved on from covering Bush. As White House reporter, this means that she is as in demand as snowshoes in Miami. She is a fair, honest, and courageous reporter who is now going to spend several months covering a political non-entity--causing her to become a journalistic non-entity. In lipstick.
Posted by: Erik | Sep 5, 2008 3:17:06 PM
History will judge his presidency. Hmmm, depends on who writes history, if they do, then Lincoln, JFK, Roosevelt, and other notables will look like losers next to him. On the other hand,...oh wait, there is no other hand.
Posted by: Jake | Sep 5, 2008 3:19:15 PM
The disrespect for the highest office in this country is embarrassing. Though the democratic party has tried desperately to turn Americans against Bush, there are many, and I mean many of us who like and respect George Bush. Though it may seem were are the minority, we actual aren't. We just don't go running around spreading rumors. We honestly have better ways to spend our time... God Bless America...God Bless Our Troops...God Bless George Bush... A proud American..
Posted by: cj78415 | Sep 5, 2008 3:26:57 PM
And WHY would we be interested in Bob Woodwards book? Hey, look at the person who wrote it! Not like it's a fair and balanced assessment.....not! I guess Bob can't help himself! I hope that Bob does the same "investigative reporting" if Obama gets elected. Why isn't Bob Woodward investigating Obama's ties to Frank Marshall Davis or William Ayers? Maybe it would make Obama look bad? Nah!
Posted by: justrighttoo | Sep 5, 2008 3:27:02 PM
The problem with the Bush administration was Donald Rumsfeld. Senator John S McCain stood up to Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and spoke up for the generals and commanders on the ground.
Posted by: FortuneFavorsTheBrave | Sep 5, 2008 3:36:53 PM
To cj78415: The Democratic party didn't have to try to turn Americans against Bush. He did that all by himself.
Posted by: Veronica | Sep 5, 2008 3:37:24 PM
You missed my point completely Veronica...They tried too, but it didn't happen. If they got you to agree with them..well..that was your choice..
Posted by: cj78415 | Sep 5, 2008 3:42:29 PM
Bush is looked at around the world as the local village idiot. They don't need a book to tell them that.
Posted by: Jim Bob | Sep 5, 2008 3:42:38 PM
20 years from now people will be longing for GW. Look at Regan is was consider a incompetent senile old man when he left office under suspicion from Iran/Contra gate (Ollie North, Fawn Hall), now everyone talks lovingly about him.
Posted by: david | Sep 5, 2008 3:50:54 PM
Dems put Bush in.
Woodward usually works for CSIS out of Toronto.
Posted by: FDE | Sep 5, 2008 4:01:06 PM
David,
Not everyone talks lovingly about President Reagan (at least I assume you mean him). He gets a great deal of credit for single-handedly defeating the Soviet Union, when macro-economic events took their toll for year.
George W. Bush took our country from a position of moral authority, world respect and economic prosperity, and through his inaction and stupidity, managed to reverse our fortune in each of these categories. If history holds him in high regard, it will only be the result of the further failure of America.
Regardless of who wins this year's election, Americans as a people will spend 20 years digging out of the hole he has created for us.
Posted by: bigdaddycanelxa | Sep 5, 2008 4:07:32 PM
O.K. So everyone wants to throw stones, but how quickly we forget. We were attacked and President Bush "TOOK" the required action(s) to prevent it from happening again...So I'm not a big Bush supporter, but we've not been invaded or attacked since....and that boys & girls is the primary job of The President of The United States of America
Posted by: t5z3g7 | Sep 5, 2008 4:16:08 PM
Typical neo-con propaganda, where was there respect for the office when they went relentlessly after Clinton. Now they suddenly respect the office. New information for all neo-cons, we respect the office, we don't respect the person the occupies it.
Posted by: Bill Dull | Sep 5, 2008 4:16:12 PM
Well, I have shovel. I guess that is just what I will be doing for the next 20 years, but if the McCain and Palin ticket gets the election then the hole may get deeper than expected which may take a lot longer to dig out of.
Posted by: mere | Sep 5, 2008 4:18:32 PM
Raddatz -- "I figure we're likely spying on everyone in Iraq." Glad to see that rumors of a biased media are so completely exaggerated.
Posted by: tony | Sep 5, 2008 4:20:33 PM
"So I'm not a big Bush supporter, but we've not been invaded or attacked since....and that boys & girls is the primary job of The President of The United States of America"
A) We were never in danger of an invasion
B) Since when is this the ONLY "primary" job? How about dealing with internal crisis like hurricane Katrina, the housing or energy crisis?
Not only is President Bush an incompetent stubborn moron...he appointed to ALL levels of government unqualified people including “buddies” and “religious zealots” who went to clown colleges.
Posted by: Steve | Sep 5, 2008 4:23:41 PM
I didn't know Bush wore lipstick.
Posted by: Michael | Sep 5, 2008 4:24:34 PM
To cj78415: "They" didn't do any brain washing or anything to change my opinion George Bush did that all on his own. He lied repeatedly and I don't like liars. When Clinton said I did not have sex with that woman he lied and my opinion of him changed. Unlike many Americans my political party nor the media tell me how to feel. I don't like liars and George Bush is a liar. By the way David - well said.
Posted by: linda | Sep 5, 2008 4:25:11 PM
t5z3g7 are you for real? He took action against the wrong country and wrong people. I don't like what you said so I can bomb you? Destroy your community? WHY because he is President of the United States that makes it alright? WRONG! As the president he should have gotten the facts straight before the start of the war.
Posted by: linda | Sep 5, 2008 4:29:03 PM
Post a comment
