Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |   E-mail Dan  |  

Checking Out

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Tuesday, August 8, 2006; 11:46 AM

A vacationing President Bush briefly suited up and faced the media hordes yesterday morning to outline his administration's vision for an eventual cessation of hostilities in Lebanon. Then he high-tailed it back to his sprawling country home, leaving Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to do the heavy lifting.

Bush was generous with the familiar talking points (see yesterday's column ), but didn't exactly give the impression of someone who feels any sense of personal urgency to stop the killing.

Nedra Pickler writes for the Associated Press: "Bush dressed in suit and tie for the press conference -- a departure from the casual dress and more restricted media access that are typical at the ranch. In part, the appearance was designed to show the president is engaged even when he is away from the White House. But Bush has left the negotiations to Rice and other diplomats and has not spoken with the prime ministers of Lebanon or Israel about the U.N. resolutions.

" 'Condi is handling those conversations, and she's doing a fine job of doing so,' Bush said."

Here is MSNBC's Keith Olbermann talking to Newsweek's Howard Fineman last night:

Olbermann: "Is it more than a cheap shot to say the president is on vacation? Is it even possible to stop Israel and Hezbollah without the president at least giving the appearance of being involved in the process?"

Fineman: "I don't think it's a cheap shot, although the White House is trying to tell everybody that this is a much shorter vacation than he has taken in the past. But the key thing is not how many days he spends in Crawford, it's what he does or doesn't do when he's there.

"Unfortunately for him, his Crawford record of vigilance is not that terrific politically or substantively. . . .

"Now you've got the combination of him being down in Crawford while at the same time saying that he's not talking to the two most important leaders in the Middle East conflict right now, the leaders of Israel and Lebanon."

Olbermann: "Does anybody there believe in history? Would somebody say to Mr. Bush, 'Hey, you know, it would mean something, at least symbolically, if you delayed this trip even by a couple of days if there was some sense that it was not business as usual'?"

Fineman: "There may be some people who might say that to him. They're not in his inner circle. Some measure of August vacation in Crawford is sacrosanct with George W. Bush. They think they've made a big sacrifice; he thinks he's made a big sacrifice by having it only be about 10 to 11 days and not the nearly month that he sometimes takes and would prefer to take."

Meanwhile, in Lebanon

Tom Perry writes for Reuters: "Israeli air raids and ground battles with Hizbollah guerrillas convulsed south Lebanon on Tuesday amid diplomatic wrangling over how to end a four-week-old war that has killed more than 1,000 people."


CONTINUED     1              >


© 2006 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive