Untitled Document
Message delivery was a big theme at the White House yesterday.
First, Karen Hughes was over for breakfast. The president's finest spinner
is headed back onto the public payroll with a new and challenging goal: Improving
Bush's image in the Muslim world.
Then at the mid-day briefing, Press Secretary Scott McClellan officially confirmed
that the White House is blowing off the Government Accountability Office's finding
that prepackaged administration video news releases constitute illegal covert
propaganda.
Prepackaged Video Reports
Here's Brian Williams on the NBC Nightly News last night: "If the White
House is struggling with the public relations effort in the Middle East, here
at home some say they are perfecting the craft of public relations disguised
as news -- and it's getting a lot of air time."
Then Andrea Mitchell reported that "for millions of viewers, the government
has found the best way to spin the news is to produce the stories itself. .
. .
"On issues from Medicare to farm prices, hundreds of local stations are
running stories extolling Bush administration policies, reaching tens of millions
of people.
"But all these reports were written and distributed by the administration
and its public relations firms -- not by journalists."
Christopher Lee writes in The Washington Post about the memos the White House
sent out last week, insisting "that it is legal for federal agencies to
feed TV stations prepackaged news stories that do not disclose the government's
role in producing them."
Those memos essentially overruled a Feb. 17 memo from Comptroller General David
M. Walker. Lee writes: "In an interview yesterday, Walker said the administration's
approach is both contrary to appropriations law and unethical.
"'This is more than a legal issue. It's also an ethical issue and involves
important good government principles, namely the need for openness in connection
with government activities and expenditures,' Walker said."
Here's McClellan addressing the issue in his briefing yesterday: "As long
as this is factual information about department or agency programs, it is perfectly
appropriate," he said. In fact, he added, "I think agencies and departments
have an obligation to provide the American people with factual information about
their programs."
Here's how Ken Herman reported it for Cox News Service: "The White House,
intent on continuing to crank out 'video news releases' that look like television
news stories, has told government agency heads to ignore a Government Accountability
Office memo criticizing the practice as illegal propaganda."
Karen Hughes is in the House
So can someone even as uniquely talented as Karen Hughes put a good face on
American public diplomacy in the Middle East -- when the current face is sometimes
that of a hooded torture victim at Abu Ghraib?
Her welcome back to Washington yesterday certainly couldn't have been much
more gushy.
Bush released an effusive announcement: "Karen Hughes has been one of
my most trusted and closest advisers, and she has the experience, expertise,
and judgment to lead this critical effort. Her return to public service in this
important position signifies my personal commitment to the international diplomacy
that is needed in these historic times."
The White House released a photo of Hughes having breakfast with Bush and Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice in the president's private dining room.
Here's the transcript of Rice and Hughes' joint appearance at the State Department.
Rice declared: "The time has come to look anew at our institutions of
public diplomacy. . . .
"I can think of no individual more suited nor more suited for this task
of telling America's story to the world, of nurturing America's dialogue with
the world and advancing universal values for the world than Karen Hughes."
And Hughes gave a first taste of how she'll approach the job.
"If confirmed, I look forward to working with my fellow citizens to share
our country's good heart and our idealism and our values with the world. This
job will be difficult. Perceptions do not change quickly or easily. This is
a struggle for ideas."
But will Hughes solely try to spread the word of U.S. accomplishments -- or
will she express humility over some of its failures? There was a brief hint
of the latter, when she said: "America has often struggled to live up to
our own ideals and we have much to learn about becoming better citizens of the
world."
But apparently she didn't mean torture. "We must do a better job of teaching
our children to learn about different languages, and cultures, and faiths,"
she explained.
Farah Stockman writes in the Boston Globe that the Hughes nomination is "a
move that officials said is meant to aggressively tackle the plummeting image
of the United States abroad, particularly in the Arab world."
David Gregory explained the Hughes mission this way, on NBC: "One source
close to the White House says the president is playing for legacy now. He doesn't
want to be remembered as, quote, a war monger."
AFP writes: "Rebuilding the US image abroad after the Bush administration's
unilateral decision to invade Iraq two years ago will be a challenge, however,
even for someone as formidable as Hughes."
John Roberts noted on the CBS News that Hughes "does have a pretty unique
talent for humanizing White House policy." He also reported that in spite
of the apparent urgency of her task, Hughes is "not going to start it full
time until later this summer."
Helen Thomas Watch
It has been noted a lot recently that Hearst columnist Helen Thomas frequently
asks questions in the briefing room that suggest a certain lack of confidence
in the Bush administration's policies.
Yesterday's exchange with McClellan was a classic:
"Go ahead, Helen.
"Q Diplomacy depends on policy. You can't sell what is unsaleable. If
the policy remains that we will engage further in preemptive war, you cannot
sell it to the Middle East, I'm sure, or anywhere else. So are you going to
change any policy?
"MR. McCLELLAN: Our policy is to expand freedom and democracy and to support
the aspirations of people --
"Q By gunpoint?
"MR. McCLELLAN: -- and support the aspirations of people in countries
around the world that do not have the freedoms that we enjoy. And, no, Helen,
the President made it very clear in his inaugural address that it is not primarily
the use of arms. It is supporting the aspirations of the people in those countries
and doing all we can to stand with those people as they seek greater freedoms.
We are standing with the people of Lebanon. We are standing with the people
of the Palestinian Territories. We are standing with --
"Q We also invaded Iraq.
"MR. McCLELLAN: -- we are standing with the people of Iraq, and the people
of Iraq have shown that freedom is a universal value. They stood up and defied
the terrorists and went to the polls.
"Q And we invaded the country.
"MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead, Terry."
Last Year's Flap
Hughes herself noted that in her new job, she may need to "varnish"
what some have called her combative style. In the past, she's not always been
what you might call subtle.
Last April, speaking on CNN with Wolf Blitzer, Hughes got into hot water by
seeming to suggest that supporters of abortion rights have the same values as
terrorists.
Here's what she said: "I think after September 11th the American people
are valuing life more and realizing that we need policies to value the dignity
and worth of every life.
"And President Bush has worked to say, let's be reasonable, let's work
to value life, let's try to reduce the number of abortions, let's increase adoptions.
"And I think those are the kind of policies that the American people can
support, particularly at a time when we're facing an enemy, and really the fundamental
difference between us and the terror network we fight is that we value every
life."
Hughes later said it was a "gross distortion" to interpret her remarks
as likening abortion-rights advocates to terrorists.
Another Move
The White House also announced that Bush is nominating Dina Powell, the Egyptian-born
director of White House personnel, to be Hughes's deputy.
Social Security Watch
Jonathan Weisman writes in The Washington Post: "While the White House
has helped convince more than two-thirds of those polled that Social Security
is heading for a crisis or possible bankruptcy without change, 56 percent disapprove
of his approach, a survey of 1,001 adults conducted March 10-13 shows.
"Moreover, 58 percent of those polled this time said the more they hear
about Bush's plan, the less they like it. The latest polling, combined with
detailed interviews last week, shows that Bush's drive to significantly alter
the 70-year-old national insurance program has run into significant hurdles
with every age cohort."
Some more findings from the poll: Of the various solutions mentioned to Social
Security's long-term financing shortfalls, there was only one that received
more than 50 percent support in the poll: "Collecting Social Security taxes
on all the money a worker earns, rather than taxing only up to the first $90,000
of annual income."
Increasing the Social Security tax rate, the only solution Bush has said is
off the table, wasn't popular -- only 32 percent were in favor. But that's still
made it considerably more popular than the only thing virtually guaranteed to
be part of Bush's plan, once he gets around to publicly describing it: Reducing
guaranteed benefits for future retirees. Only 20 percent of those polled thought
that was a good idea.
Here are the poll results. And here's a chart showing Bush's approval ratings
over time.
A new Gallup Poll is out, too. It shows Bush's approval rating steady at 52
percent, with 44 percent disapproving.
The Anti-Bush
In The Washington Post, Kevin Sullivan writes about how Venezuelan President
Hugo Chavez is something of an "anti-Bush" -- a fiery populist rallying
developing nations against United States imperialism.
"In a recent televised speech, Chavez described the arms purchases and
a plan to increase army reserve troops as 'an honorable answer to President
Bush's intention of being the master of the world.'
"Chavez is the most vocal and visible symbol of a rising tide of anti-American
sentiment in Latin America. Leaders in the region are increasingly disillusioned
because a decade or more of the Washington prescription -- democracy and free-market
economics -- has failed to alleviate poverty and economic inequality."
So what is Bush going to do about that?
Andy Webb-Vidal writes in the Financial Times: "Senior US administration
officials are working on a policy to 'contain' Hugo Chávez, the Venezuelan
president, and what they allege is his drive to 'subvert' Latin America's least
stable states.
"A strategy aimed at fencing in the government of the world's fifth-largest
oil exporter is being prepared at the request of President George W. Bush and
Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state, senior US officials say. The move signals
a renewed interest by the administration in a region that has been relatively
neglected in recent years. . . .
"The policy shift in Washington, which a US military officer said is at
an early stage but is centred on the goal of 'containment', could also have
implications for the world oil market."
Treaty Watch
David E. Sanger writes in the New York Times: "Behind President Bush's
recent shift in dealing with Iran's nuclear program lies a less visible goal:
to rewrite, in effect, the main treaty governing the spread of nuclear technology,
without actually renegotiating it.
"In their public statements and background briefings in recent days, Mr.
Bush's aides have acknowledged that Iran appears to have the right -- on paper,
at least -- to enrich uranium to produce electric power. But Mr. Bush has managed
to convince his reluctant European allies that the only acceptable outcome of
their negotiations with Iran is that it must give up that right. . . .
"Mr. Bush could have called for renegotiating the treaty. But in background
interviews, administration officials say they have neither the time nor the
patience for that process. By the time all 189 signers come to an agreement,
noted one official who left the White House recently: 'The Iranians will look
like the North Koreans, waving their bombs around. We can't afford to make that
mistake again.'"
St. Patrick and Politics
Warren Hoge writes in the New York Times: "Gerry Adams, the president of
Sinn Fein, arrived yesterday in New York on his annual St. Patrick's Day trip
to the United States, and played down snubs from the White House and Senator
Edward M. Kennedy, the party's most prominent supporter in American politics.
"President Bush has canceled the traditional White House gathering of
leaders of the political parties of Northern Ireland and invited instead the
six women from the family of Robert McCartney, who have been leading vocal protests
over his killing in January in a Belfast pub by a group that included members
of the Irish Republican Army. Sinn Fein is the political wing of the I.R.A."
Joke Thief
Richard Leiby writes in The Washington Post: "A joke President Bush told
recently in Montana struck several readers as very familiar when it was recounted
in yesterday's Style section. In Bush's telling, the joke involved a city slicker
asking for directions in Livingston and being told to look for two 'cattle guards.'
Now, everyone in cowboy country knows a cattle guard is a metal grate that keeps
livestock from straying. But this fellow is so clueless, he asks: 'Hey, what
color uniforms do those cattle guards have on?'
"In 1978, when Dubya was running for Congress in Texas, the very same
joke was on him."
Nicholas D. Kristof has the details, in a New York Times story from 2000, describing
that 1978 congressional race:
"A candidate forum was under way, and his rival was needling Mr. Bush
with an oft-repeated joke in which he was the punchline, a yarn that reinforced
a perception of him as a spoiled rich kid from back East.
"Kent Hance, the Democratic candidate and a smooth-talking good old boy,
was telling a yarn about working in a field along a rural road. Then along came
a fancy car.
"'It was a Mercedes,' drawled Mr. Hance, raising his eyebrows, and the
audience tittered knowingly at the hint that Mr. Bush was the kind of man more
comfortable in a Mercedes than a pick-up. 'The guy rolled down the window and
wanted to know how to get to a certain ranch.'
"Mr. Hance recounted how he'd given the man directions, telling him to
turn right after a cattle guard, a metal grate ubiquitous in rural roads to
keep livestock from straying. 'Then,' Mr. Hance continued, 'he said, "what
color uniform will that cattle guard be wearing?"'
"The audience roared with laughter, and just to be sure that the voters
got the connection with the Connecticut-born Mr. Bush, Mr. Hance said he had
noticed something else about the Mercedes: 'It had Connecticut license plates.'"
Bush lost that race.
Halliburton Watch
Griff Witte writes in The Washington Post: "Pentagon auditors found more
than $100 million in questionable costs in one section of a massive, no-bid
Halliburton Co. contract for delivering fuel to Iraq, according to a summary
of their report released yesterday by congressional Democrats. . . .
"Halliburton, where Vice President Cheney served as chief executive from
1995 to 2000, has come under persistent criticism for its handling of several
Iraqi reconstruction contracts."
Here's the report from congressional Democrats, and their letter to Bush asking
for an explanation.
The Wead Tapes
AFP reports: "The writer who secretly recorded phone conversations in which
then-Texas Governor George W. Bush appeared to suggest past illegal drug use,
issued a public apology to the president.
"Doug Wead, an author and longtime Bush family friend, wrote in a letter
appearing in the USA Today newspaper that his decision in the late 1990's to
record the future president without his knowledge had been 'foolish and wrong.'"