Five years into George W. Bush’s presidency, the popular imagination has seized on a simple narrative about the president’s character. The story goes that the president is uncommonly stubborn, and once he makes up his mind, refuses to change it no matter what political or public pressure may say. There’s obviously a kernel of truth to that observation — but it’s hardly the whole truth. And the press seems to be clinging to its collective myth about Bush’s stubbornness with the same sort of tenacity it ascribes to the president.
We’ve seen this kind of smoothed-over coverage again and again during the past several days, as the media have grown noticeably ponderous about the president’s woes, specifically Harriett Miers withdrawing her nomination to the Supreme Court. The New York Times stuck to the script this morning, writing that “Ms. Miers’s withdrawal is all the more remarkable because Mr. Bush so seldom backs down. Again and again, he has racked up legislative victories that once seemed improbable, or at least managed to save face.” (Emphasis ours.)
Just two paragraphs later, the Times actually punctures its own storyline, noting that the president’s “hopes for overhauling Social Security are dead for this year … and his administration was even forced to backtrack this week on its post-Katrina suspension of a law that requires paying locally prevailing wages for construction projects financed by federal money.”
In the same vein, the Chicago Tribune trumpted the same line this morning, writing that “For a president known for his strength and unshaken resolve, the loss marks an uncharacteristic moment of weakness and surrender.”
Over at the Washington Post, David Ignatius tossed his hat into the ring, opining that “for a stubborn president whose greatest weakness has been a reluctance to admit and correct mistakes, the Miers pullback is a signal event.”
That’s not to say those statements are completely false, but they hardly tell the whole story, and, as such, do some violence to the truth. Yes, the president is stubborn, he rarely admits a mistake, and his administration pursues its policy aims with a single-minded determination. But he also has a history — as all politicians do — of backing down on certain issues when his position becomes untenable.
You don’t have to take it from us; listen to what former Bush speechwriter and current National Review columnist David Frum told Hugh Hewitt on Hewitt’s radio show earlier this week:
Hewitt: Okay. Have you ever known George Bush to turn in the face of withering criticism, away from a policy he believes to be true?
Frum: Sure.
Hewitt: When?
Frum: McCain-Feingold would be one example. Steel tariffs, where he first opposed tariffs, and then imposed them, and then retracted them. He changed his mind about Bernie Kerik. He changes his mind all the time. I mean, he’s a tough guy. He’s a normal politician. And he’s not infallable. He makes mistakes … unless you’re going to say the president never makes a mistake, which nobody would argue, since the president is going to make a mistake, what should he do when he makes a mistake? Should he fix it? Or should he not fix it?
Constructing narratives is what the press does, and by necessity reporters often simplify the story for the sake of time and style. But to parrot such a facile storyline when the issue is obviously more complicated does the reader — and history — a disservice.
–Paul McLeary
Paul McLeary is a former CJR staff writer. Since 2008, he has covered the Pentagon for Foreign Policy, Defense News, Breaking Defense, and other outlets. He is currently a defense reporter for Politico.