[antimedia] antimedia: The President held....

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by antimedia:
The President held....
http://www.antimedia.us/posts/1161835569.shtml


   ....quite an impressive [1]news conference (the link is to the
   transcript) this morning. He bantered back and forth with the press,
   wouldn't take their bait on timetables and withdrawal from Iraq and
   generally seemed to enjoy the back and forth.
   One thing that amazes me about the press is the constant demand for
   accountability. Gee, Mr. President, you yourself have admitted to
   being disappointed with recent developments in Iraq. So why haven't
   you fired Don Rumsfeld?
   Well, you see, Mr. Reporter, if people got fired every time things
   weren't going well, I'd be holding this press conference in an empty
   room. 'Cause your businesses aren't going too well these days, you
   know? So why are you still employed?
   It's such a stupid question. Any time you expect to make big changes
   in anything, you're going to run into obstacles you couldn't
   anticipate, people who are working against you and setbacks galore.
   The point is, successful people don't give up at the first sign of
   trouble. They work harder to succeed. Successful people don't look for
   scapegoats for every setback. They analyze and adjust. They adapt and
   improvise.
   There were a couple of classic, biased questions asked.

     Q Mr. President, for several years you have been saying that
     America will stay the course in Iraq; you were committed to the
     policy. And now you say that, no, you're not saying, stay the
     course, that you're adapting to win, that you're showing
     flexibility. And as you mentioned, out of Baghdad we're now hearing
     about benchmarks and timetables from the Iraqi government, as
     relayed by American officials, to stop the sectarian violence.
     In the past, Democrats and other critics of the war who talked
     about benchmarks and timetables were labeled as defeatists,
     defeat-o-crats, or people who wanted to cut and run. So why
     shouldn't the American people conclude that this is nothing from
     you other than semantic, rhetorical games and all politics two
     weeks before an election?

   First of all, Democrats have never discussed benchmarks, which are
   goals by another name. The only thing they've discussed is withdrawing
   from Iraq. Secondly, the President's recent statements are entirely
   consistent with his "stay the course" policy, which the media has
   falsely characterized as rigidity and resistance to change. In fact,
   the President clearly laid out the various changes and adjustments
   they have made in Iraq, adapting to the situation on the ground. It
   isn't his fault the media isn't listening, but their claims about what
   he's said should be understood for what they are -- false
   characterizations of his true policy.
   First they asked why Rumsfeld hasn't been "held accountable" for "the
   mistakes" in Iraq. Then came this question.

     Q May I ask you, sir, following up, when you say that you're not
     satisfied with the way things are going in Iraq, why should that
     not be interpreted by some to mean that you are dissatisfied with
     Prime Minister Maliki's performance?

   I'm starting to think that journalists never have performance reviews.
   All their editors do is stroke their egos and tell them how great they
   are.
   For God's sake, man, have you never in your life been criticized for
   anything? Do you really, seriously think you are perfect? Because I
   certainly don't. I get consistently high reviews from my boss, but she
   also discussses my weaknesses and the areas that I need to improve.
   All humans make mistakes. If every time they made a mistake, or things
   didn't go swimmingly on the project they were assigned to do, their
   boss discussed his or her disapproval of them, no progress at all
   would be made.
   Listen to me closely, you media whores. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO DON"T MAKE
   MISTAKES ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING NOTHING. Got it?

References

   1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061025.html