Philosophy, Not Policy Why Bush isn't good at interviews.

Opinion Journal ^ | February 8, 2004 | Peggy Noonan

[Alissa]

President Bush's interview on "Meet the Press" seems to me so much a big-story-in-the-making that I wanted to weigh in with some thoughts. I am one of those who feel his performance was not impressive.

It was an important interview. The president has been taking a beating for two months now--two months of the nonstop commercial for the Democratic Party that is the Democratic primaries, and then the Kay report. And so people watched when he decided to come forward in a high stakes interview with Tim Russert, the tough interviewer who's an equal-opportunity griller of Democrats. He has heroic concentration and a face like a fist. His interviews are Beltway events.

[Alissa]

Have to disagree with Peggy this time.

[markman46]

i though the pres did a good job

[byteback]

I agree with Peggy. Bush had to know that the WMD questions would be what they were and he hemmed and hawed around the answer. I can't figure out why he can't say that Saddam declared that he had weapons but we haven't figured out yet what happemed to them or if they are still in tact where they are.

[stradivarius]

bump

[Steve Eisenberg]

i though the pres did a good job

I did too, but, then, I read it.

I also thought the Meet the Press was not the kind of thing the President should be doing after Labor Day.

[tkathy]

This is not about glib performance, it's about credibility, and I thought he did fine. He looked tired.

[thinktwice]

Speaking of Tim Russert, Noonan writes ... He has heroic concentration

Concentration on three items does not heroic concentration make.

Almost every word from Russert's mouth involved WMD, pre-emptive action, or 560+ American dead -- question after question -- and that is the entire democratic party line.

President Bush displayed patience with Russert's narrow attack, and Bush answered the questions with honesty and facts.

Bush proved in the interview that he deserves re-election -- there is greatness within him.

[bwteim]

Has Russert gained some weight? He's seems like he's got enough stored away to last until spring.

[Pukin Dog]

Peggy's frame of reference is off.

Everyone gets compared to the Gipper. Bush did fine for BUSH.

Compared to Reagan, everyone else is a hack.

[over3Owithabrain]

The interview was damaging. What was the WH thinking letting that a-hole Russert interview him with nothing but 2 or 3 repetitive attack questions? The whole thing was set up to make Bush look bad and give sound bite fodder for the Dems. In addition, Noonan is correct - Bush is lousy at giving good responses. He should have hit the economy issue out of the park, rising market, employment, manufacturing, spending, confidence. Instead he gives his usual sleepy "I think it's coming around" impression. The more Bush looks and acts defensive and lets the Dems control the debate, the worse it's going to get for him - and us.

[beavus]

She's right. The President sounded like he was struggling to make a contorted point that he had to keep reiterating b/c he didn't quite make it the first time.

I don't know why. The argument couldn't be clearer:
(1) WMDs existed (Hussein used them repeatedly);
(2) WMDs or their destruction was not accounted for;
(3) Bush chose not to assume the WMDs did not exist simply because Hussein refused to account for them.

In the setting of 9/11, if Bush had NOT proceeded on the assumption that Iraq had WMDs, he should've been impeached. Especially since, WMDs or not, Hussein has had it coming for a long, long time.

BTW, the WMDs are STILL not accounted for. It seems to me a reporter's foremost question to the President of the US should be "Where are the WMD now?". WMDs on the loose do, afterall, constitute an active national security threat.

[marty60]

Now let's see: Bush is 1. Fighting a WAR. 2. Getting us out of the Things recession. 3. Fighting the slanderous lies eminateing from the evil Dums. 4.Trying to bring civility back into the American Society etc. etc.

Yet Peggy Noonan and the rest of the pathetic airheads in the media think the most important thing Bush has to do is do a good interview with Tim Russert.

Give me a break.

[tornado100]

I just saw the interview -- Bush did just fine, although he should have mentioned that his intel was the same as Clinton's and the UN's. We know that Iraq had the precursor elements, but where did they go? We do not know, but one of these items, 7 lbs.of cyanide salt, was recently found in the possession of an al-Qaeda operative.

[Always Right]

I agree with Peggy, Bush's answers were not all that sharp. Bush really should have showed some emotions when defending himself in the guard and on Iraq. Bush is letting the criticism live on by not defending his postition that well.

[Always Right]

Yet Peggy Noonan and the rest of the pathetic airheads in the media think the most important thing Bush has to do is do a good interview with Tim Russert. Give me a break.

When you have lost 10 points in your approval rating in the last month and are up for re-election, yes.

[woofie]

disagree...Bush was great!

[sinkspur]

Bush really should have showed some emotions when defending himself in the guard and on Iraq. Bush is letting the criticism live on by not defending his postition that well.

The "guard" issue is phony. Nobody, but nobody give's a rat's ass about it.

If Iraq continues to improve, nobody will give one thought to this interview in October.

[_Jim]

Speaking of Tim Russert, Noonan writes ... He has heroic concentration

"Mono-minded" is more like it!

[explodingspleen]

On the premise that Peggy is correct here, I think Bush ought to challenge the candidate the Dems choose to a written debate.

How easy it is to tear apart left-wing ideology when you have time to consult statistics, studies, and empirical precedents; and can force them to backup their assertions, likewise.