Exactly my point. I didn’t say he didn’t get roasted over a slow flame, but at least he did it. I just can’t see Bush ever agreeing to put himself in the same situation.
Ah, Condi Rice – the Voice of Truth.
Exactly my point. I didn’t say he didn’t get roasted over a slow flame, but at least he did it. I just can’t see Bush ever agreeing to put himself in the same situation.
Ah, Condi Rice – the Voice of Truth.
**december, ** I wasn’t aware of any CBS refusal to allow Rice to speak. As a general practice, though, I almost never watch scripted political speeches (not just Bush’s; I’m an equal-opportunity ignorer in this respect), because they have so little actual content. Like most network news, they are so dumbed-down as to be virtually worthless in figuring out the nuts and bolts of what the speaker believes and intends to accomplish, and how.
So count me as at least one person for whom Bush’s address didn’t upstage the Saddam interview, because I refuse to watch watered-down crap. If Bush is so convinced that he is right (and I’m not saying he’s wrong, if only in the sense that I do believe Iraq will be much better off without Saddam Hussein, but I do believe we’re going about it completely in the wrong way), then what would he have to lose by making his opinions known on live public TV?
I think Bush is just afraid that any debate moderator would try to pin him down to divulge concrete details of how he intends to help Iraq, and I think he doesn’t have more than the foggiest notion of any sort of concrete post-regime change plan.
Oh, **Beagle, ** Saddam Hussein’s proposition was to do it via sattelite; the two men would not even be on the same continent.
The simple reason is that the State has expended a lot of PR (remember when it used to be called propoganda? Well, it is still is… just not when applied to us) work trying to program everyone to think Saddam is a Crazy Irrational Evil Lying Mean Person.
By programming everyone to react that way, any sound bites they get from him will be automatically disregarded as lies from the Crazy Dictator - no matter how much merit they may have. The news agencies are suspiciously compliant with this goal, and the newscasters may as well roll their eyes whenever they report anything Saddam says.
In any case, allowing an actual live debate, more than just sound bites, might serve to allow people to realize that Saddam may not be completely and randomly insane. Sure, he’s a brutal asshole, but we might lose the impression that he’s just a whacky psychotic malevolent liar - that he may actually make sense and be rational, if brutal. That’s not acceptable. We all must react to whatever Saddam says with automatic distrust, convinced by the State that he is random evil insanity incarnate.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Fox had something up it’s sleeve.
If you’re interested, you can check out the video and transcripts at http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml
Note also that
So, the Saddam interview was pretty close to the kind of scripted political speech that you prefer not to watch.
BTW I did watch the Bush speech and found it had no new content. You didn’t miss anything IMHO. The significance was that he delivered it as a “major address.” It seems to be a step toward war.
This is truly the oddest pit thread I’ve read in a long while…amazing.
I think the two should have a televised cut-throat game of “Go Fish” or possibly “Old Maid.”
Well, first, I wasn’t denying that CBS had turned down Rice, just noting that I hadn’t heard about it.
I’m sure Rather had his own notes and memory to rely on, in addition to the (edited) tapes and the memory of the CBS producer who was also present. I have no way of knowing right now whether significant and/or relevant chunks were cut out during the editing process, but given that CBS staff reviewed the quality of the Arabic/English interpretation and found it to be accurate, I’d guess that if something major had been deleted, Rather would have brought it up during the commentary he made between chunks of the interview video.
And AFAIK there was no pre-screening of Rather’s interview questions, so less opportunity to carefully script answers. I wish Bush had the guts to do something similar. I also wish you’d base your analysis on your own observations of the video and/or transcripts, rather than those of a newspaper columnist. Primary sources are your friend.
[Disclaimer: the cousin I mentioned in a thread a few days ago – the journalist who shipped out for Kuwait the Sunday before last – works for CBS, and it’s entirely possible that he was involved in this story, directly or indirectly. I honestly don’t know any details, but if I ever get to talk to him about it, I’ll see if he’ll share anything that wasn’t made public. Not confidential stuff, but maybe stuff that wasn’t aired for reasons of length or perceived relevance or whatever. Dan Rather is my cousin’s boss.]
Fuck I feel so out of touch, I totally missed that interview, and I missed the Bush speech to boot.
Admittedly, this is through a translator and may be edited, but this is the best example of dancing around a question I’ve seen in a long time:
Yes, thank you, that’s plenty clear.
CBS’ side of the story as to why Bush (or someone else from the White House) didn’t end up being interviewed:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030226/tv_nm/iraq_usa_cbs_dc_10
A-fucking-men.
Personally, I’m hoping for Fear Factor with George and Saddam.
You know, there’s a comedy radio quiz show in the UK called “Just a Minute”, where the contestant has to talk for 60 seconds without hesitation on a subject they know nothing about. I think we may have a possible world champ here.
Hmmmmm…from what I see in a brief scanning of the posts, it seems everyone is debating what would happen when Bush loses the debate.
Try this on for size: just suppose that Bush WINS the debate (and for that matter, how would we score it? And who would count?) Suppose Bush just absolutely blows Sadaam off the stage. (Remember, this is an intellectual exercise for all you Bush haters).
Do you honestly think that Sadaam would just throw up his hands, say “You’re right, I’m an evil despot.”…and LEAVE??? Give up his rulership???
It is to laugh.
So why would any sane person enter into a “debate” that they can only lose?? Bush is right to refuse to enter into that sham.