Posted on 06/07/2006 7:19:31 AM PDT by george76
When President Bush nominated Gen. Michael Hayden to run the CIA, the press focused on disapproving Democrats and even some Republicans who were dubious about confirmation.
A month later, when the Senate confirmed Hayden by a 78-15 vote, the story was given much less emphasis in the media, which had moved on to other stories critical of the Bush administration.
Similarly, when Bush nominated one of his aides, Brett Kavanaugh, to the federal judiciary, the press was filled with reports about Democrats threatening a filibuster because Kavanaugh once worked for special prosecutor Kenneth Starr in the case against President Clinton.
Last week, there was much less media coverage of a Rose Garden ceremony in which Bush presided over the swearing-in of Kavanaugh, who had been confirmed by a 57-36 vote.
Bush has quietly been racking up small victories like these that seem at odds with the media’s conventional wisdom of a presidency on the skids.
In addition to success with his nominations, Bush also is presiding over a booming economy and ...
The White House remains convinced it is not getting a fair shake from the mainstream media.
“President Bush’s leadership is achieving a steady flow of results that do not always dominate the day’s headlines on their own but that together represent real progress for the American people,” ...
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
What victories?
Maybe in how to lose credibility with your constituancy. Handing over the country to illegals. Giving Iran nuclear stuff and generally making me embarrased I voted for him TWICE?
Sheeeeesh. Victories my eye......
Liberal bloggers are crying in their keyboards this "mourning".
"Kavanaugh once worked for special prosecutor Kenneth Starr in the case against President Clinton."
That's reason enough for the media and the lefties to hate him.
I am so grateful that we have a president not wedded to public acclamation. I don't agree with all of his policies and of late, I disagree with him more and more. But I admire his ability to lead regardless of the personal consequences. I think historians will treat him well.
maybe if you would look past the ONE issue, you could see
Bush had the same platform for immagration that he does now when you voted for him. TWICE.
I have indeed noticed in the past few weeks that, with the exception of the immigration issues, Bush has racked up some nice wins. It just proves to me how the press is hoping, PRAYING for another Watergate. They haven't brought down a President in over 30 years, and they're licking their chops. It doesn't my heart good to see that they're gonna fail.
good point. THANK YOU!
Well like it or not, I believe Bush did support a guest worker program in 2000 so I expect he will have another win there too. I wish he would have won on private social security accounts.
Thanks.
The old media focus is on bad Republicans and good DUmmies.
The same old story is tiring.
It is nice to see the real progress with Brett Kavanaugh to the federal judiciary and a 78-15 vote on Gen. Michael Hayden to run the CIA.
Good ol'Mark Halperin! The very same Mark Halperin who said, before the 2004 election, that ABC news has to take Bush to task for everything he says and to not take Kerry to task for erroneous statements.
People like him should not be in journalism.
The DUmmies may say that they do not know anyone who supports Conservative issues.
These liberals do not get out much.
You mean like how Bush has successfully seated TWO conservative Supreme Court justices, one of whom is CHIEF Justice? Yeah, failure my @$$.
And as HOTTIEBOY mentioned in an earlier post, Bush's stance on illegal immigration isnt different than when he first ran for president, so if you dont like it, you should have known before voting for him. If you didnt know, maybe you weren't as informed of a voter as you should have been. But do NOT call him a panderer.
For the record, I don't agree with his stance on immigration yet I voted for him. I do support showing our President and congressmen where we stand on immigration. If we send out a strong enough message, they'll reconsider their own soft stance. That's the beauty of the vote-seeking politicians.
Didn't you read the article?
Maybe in how to lose credibility with your constituancy. Handing over the country to illegals. Giving Iran nuclear stuff and generally making me embarrased I voted for him TWICE?
Sheeeeesh. Victories my eye......
I agree. It's like getting a free meal for yourself as the people delivering the meal take your home out from under you. If he, analysts, can't understand this, well, then the problem's bigger and more widespread than we all think.
All of Bush's "little victories" only matter in a secure nation under the rule of law. Meanwhile he's far less domestically than is on paper to make our nation more secure at home, and his complicity in not enforcing our existing laws while blabbering about "immigration reform" when we need "execution reform" and "border security" reform instead, is reprehensible.
He has plenty of time to construct a wall across nearly the entie southern border during his term if he so chooses to endorse that. AFTER that we can discuss the disposition of illegal invaders currently here. What about that is so difficult to understand, for him!
It leads to the clear and obvious conclusion that he simply doesn't want border security and has an agenda, and one that's terminal to the health of our nation over the midterm.
On the flip side, if he were to construct such a wall, a real one, not a Mr. Rogers Neighborhood one, then he'd propel himself into greatness immediately upon it's construction.
The “happy talk” by Mark Halperin is trying to spin their California Congressional race loss.
Republican Brian Bilbray won.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.