The White House press corps spent the first term of the Bush presidency in nearly complete deference to George W. Bush. They knew before the public did that Bush was in way over his head, that he and his flying monkeys continuously shaped falsehoods into truth and that Bush’s very presence in the Oval Office was a threat to U.S. security and world peace.
And yet they said nothing. Why?
Contrast their acquiescence towards Mr. Bush — who lied the nation into war based on nothing more than his personal whim — with their harsh treatment of President Clinton, whom they skewered daily for every fault and foible. What is the difference between the two men?
Bush is an aristocrat, who was awarded the presidency based solely on his family lineage. (Remember, he’s a descendant of two presidents — his father as well as Franklin Pierce.) Clinton was just a striver up from the bottom rung of society.
Clinton came from the lower middle class in a flyover state. He was no better than they were, or so they thought.
Now that Bush’s poll numbers are down, the White House press corps has been in a scrum trying to cover their collective behinds. A few of them have grown spines — but the White House has used soundbites of hot exchanges between media types and po’ old Scott McClellan to rally the GOP base.
It is a dangerous game the White House is playing. First they slap the press corps around a little and then — lest they start reporting the truth about White House malfeasance and double-dealing — they make nice by giving them secret face to face meeting with Himself:
President Bush has been holding informal off-the-record sessions with major news organizations over the last several days.
Starting Thursday, he began meeting with groups of about a half-dozen reporters from newspapers, television, news agencies and magazines. They have discussed a variety of issues including the war in Iraq, said a reporter who attended a session.
The meetings, which the journalists have agreed not to describe publicly, have been in the White House residence. They come as several news organizations have assigned new reporters, who had no relationship with Mr. Bush, to cover the White House.
David Bohrman, the Washington bureau chief for CNN, one of whose reporters attended a session, said they were a good idea.
“Most of the time, the environments that our reporters deal with the president in are very structured, very managed, and they rarely get to just kick back and have a conversation,” he said. “I think there’s a lot of value in it for both sides.”
He also said he did not see the sessions as compromising. “If something pops up in there that someone wants to follow, they are free to follow up on it,” he said.
The New York Times, which was invited to attend a session today, has declined to participate.
Good for the New York Times, but that hardly makes up for sitting on the story about Bush’s illegal domestic spying program through the 2004 election cycle.
