GWB's Prepackaged Press Conference Today

Well. We all know that every question he was asked had already been submitted to Karl Rove and the PNAC guys well before the pre-planned Press Conference. So Karl and PNAC boys had already briefed the President exactly how to answer every question.

And yet, the American people (at least 52% of them who put that parrot in the White House again), buy this bullshit that has been packaged and presented by “for-profit" media. He can recite his reasons for what he does, including outsourcing of torture. I don’t need nor buy his (profit motivated friends’) reasons.

Gore Vidal once said something to the effect that in this age of “manufacturing consent” assisted by the mainstream media, it is no wonder that the Americans go every four years to the polls and vote against their own best interest.

Subject of this debate: Did you buy anything that Bush said in the Press Conference today? Or was the cash register profits of his cronies ringing in your brain as he uttered every pre-written scripted word?

Here’s an idea (though it will take work on your part past whipping up some stupid rant): What was said during the press conference that you take issue with?

No, we don’t all know it.

I certainly imagine Mr. Bush thoroughly prepares himself, but I’m not aware of any mechanism that is pre-screening the questions he’s asked.

Are you contending there is such a mechanism?

Here’s a clue…

Dunno if the press conference in the OP was pre-screened, but it’s not as if there isn’t a precedent for it from this administration:

It’s also interesting to note that apparently Bush does less preparing for press conferences than his predecessors did:

One thing the OP doesn’t address – how many gay escorts were in attendance? :wink:

This doesn’t refer to a press conference, rather a town hall meeting.

A rose by any other name is still a rose…

It was still an oppurtunity for a group of people to ask Bush questions was it not?

OK. Brutus. Here we go. Let’s have some fun. Here are a couple of the clown’s jewels. I have plenty more from the mouth of this dork. Let me know if you want more.

But will Iraq ever be capable of defending herself? Exactly when that’ll be? Come on now. Since we are the ones who decide when Iraq is capable of defending herself, we can be there for 5, 10, 20, 30 or beyond 40 years until we decide whether they are capable of defending themselves (or when they are going to run out of oil). Come on. Who are you kidding? It is over 40 years we have been saying that it is the “sovereign” House of Saud who has “asked us” to be there “to protect” their sovereignty” !!! Give me a break. It is the Oil, stupid, just as Clinton said “It is the Economy, stupid”.

Yeah, and the government can also say: there is Las Vegas, take your week’s paycheck and place a bet on a Blackjack table. It is you who can decide. But if you don’t know how to play Blackjack, that is your problem. Go hire Merrill Lynch investment advisors with your miserly paycheck to teach you how to play. Of course, what they don’t tell you is that the Merrill Lynch fees far outweigh your entire paycheck. So, who is winning here?

Well, as long as we have a thread open to bash Bush, who cares what the OP entailed, right?

Remember the scene in The Perfect Storm near the end when the boat was rising and falling in really high waves? That’s how I feel about you based on posts political/non-political.

Wake up call, here’s a wake up call. (Heh, I have a feeling you’ll see that often based on this). When you want to Pit Bush, put it in the Pit.

I see little, well actually nothing, in your OP that is worthy of a debate. As you state in your last line, you have your mind made up about it and just want to bitch about it. Very acceptable here, considering it’s Bush, but wrong forum and lame attempt to appear witty. YMMV, IMHO, and all other qualifiers needed.

But a gardenia is not.

Does ‘press conference’ = ‘an oppurtunity for any group of people to ask questions’?
Or is the definition of the word ‘press’ somehow involved?

You’re getting to be as bad as Rumsfeld.

As Mr. Limbaugh says, “Words mean things.”

Quoted Limbaugh (or Franken) should get your GD posting priviliges revoked for a week.

You’re right that there’s a huge difference between press conferences and these fake ‘town hall’ PR activities. Though the whole ‘Gannon/Guckert’ thing brings that into question.

Confucius’ rectification of names is just so over done and wouldn’t have nearly the same impact on Reedy.

I don’t mean to get into a hijack, but why the hell should quoting Al Franken a) be equated with quoting Rush Limbaugh, and b) be seen as some kind of negative?

Al Franken is an intelligent and politically minded person who trades in facts. He doesn’t lie or distort, except when clearly engaged in satire. If he makes errors, he corrects them.

I could see an argument made that citing him is essentially citing a secondary source, since he relies on information or expert opinion generated by others. But you appear to be suggesting that citing Franken would be wrong for other reasons.

I would suspect others might say the same thing about Limbaugh.

I trust neither of them. It’s the only sane thing to do. In the end, they’re both commentators with different viewpoints. That is, they’re giving you their opinions of the data. Stick to the data yourself and leave the middleman out.

I know the Bush team demanded to pre-screen questions at the “town hall” presidential debate last year, but I don’t think they do the same at WH press conferences. Reporters do not have to submit their questions in advance and can ask what they like – provided they get called on. (Of course, Helen Thomas was pushed to the back of the room in 2003 and rarely gets called on any more.)

Limbaugh is intentionally and consciously funny with the facts.
That’s the great joy in listening to him.

It is not about Bush bashing. It is the whole charade, in which Bush really plays an insignificant part. Here is another man’s opinion about the current state of Fake News. It was published yesterday in the New York Times.