Campaign Desk thought the press did a pretty good job questioning President Bush during last night’s prime time news conference — journalists were less deferential and more insistent on pressing their questions, without seeming hostile, than we’d seen them in news conferences past. The Associated Press’ Terence Hunt set the tone with the very first question, asking the president about critics’ comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam; two questions later, Terry Moran of ABC asked the president to “explain to Americans” how he got a number of claims about Iraq “so wrong.” Later, Mike Allen of The Washington Post and Bush engaged in the following exchange:
Allen: Mr. President, why are you and the vice president insisting on appearing together before the 9/11 commission? And, Mr. President, who will we be handing the Iraqi government over to on June 30th?
Bush: We’ll find that out soon. That’s what Mr. Brahimi is doing. He’s figuring out the nature of the entity we’ll be handing sovereignty over.
And, secondly, because the 9/11 commission wants to ask us questions, that’s why we’re meeting. And I look forward to meeting with them and answering their questions.
Allen: I was asking why you’re appearing together, rather than separately, which was their request.
Bush: Because it’s a good chance for both of us to answer questions that the 9/11 commission is looking forward to asking us. And I’m looking forward to answering them.
Allen’s focused questions and follow-up showed the president to be unwilling to engage the issue of why he will appear before the 9/11 commission only in tandem with Vice President Cheney — and that was telling in itself.
But not all questioners were so focused, and not all questions were so vital. From here, the press seemed inordinately focused on trying to get the president to take blame and admit mistakes — a line of questioning that struck us as fishing for soundbites rather than addressing real issues. This president is famous for staying relentlessly on message; after he conspicuously passed on his initial opportunity to shoulder some blame for September 11, journalists should have moved on, knowing he wasn’t going to change his rhetoric on a whim. They might instead have asked the president to engage specific policy issues, or asked about something other then Iraq or September 11, such as the economy.
And we were disappointed to see journalists fail to press the president about any number of specific on-the-record inconsistencies that they could have pointed to. As we mentioned above, direct questions have a better chance of forcing direct answers, while fishing about for an admission that everyone knows is not forthcoming merely leaves an opening for the recitation of well-worn talking points and rhetorical asides. We don’t need press conferences to hear that.
–Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is a writer at CJR Daily.