Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |   E-mail Dan  |  
Page 3 of 5   <       >

The Big Muddy

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.

As the Associated Press reports: "Bartlett did not deny a New York Times report saying the head of the U.S.-led Multinational Forces in Iraq and the U.S. ambassador were working on a plan that for the first time would set a specific timetable for disarming militias and meeting other political and economic goals.

"'I was a bit puzzled about the report over the weekend because it was stating something that we've been talking publicly about for months,' the senior White House counselor said on CBS's 'The Early Show.' Bartlett said the goal is to 'define demonstrable milestones and benchmarks' and said it has been 'very much a part of our strategy all along.'

"The White House earlier had said the report in Sunday's editions of the Times was not accurate. Bartlett said he thought it 'might have been overwritten.'...

"Bartlett, appearing on CNN, said that 'if we do as some have suggested -- let's just set a timetable and get out as quickly as possible -- that can only embolden the enemy, it could only provide sanctuary for terrorism and that's going to be a situation that makes our country less secure and that's something the president is not going to accept.'"

But the fact remains that any public timetable at all would be a dramatic change in strategy for the White House. Bush has been asked repeatedly to give some indication of the limits of American involvement in Iraq, and consistently has refused.

A typical, maddeningly vague response, from his June 14 press conference: "I have said to the American people, as the Iraqis stand up, we'll stand down. But I've also said that our commanders on the ground will make that decision."

Tony Snow, Head-Banger

No one has made more of a hash of explaining Bush's Iraq policies than Tony Snow, his Fox News-trained press secretary.

And on Friday, in what I suspect is the first time in briefing-room history, Snow banged his head against the podium in exasperation with a reporter who was trying to get him to confront some of his own contradictions.

Poor Tony. Being asked to explain his own words.

ABC News reporter Martha Raddatz was pursuing an important line of inquiry: If the White House insists that it is not entertaining any changes in its Iraq strategy (only tactics), then why is it claiming that it is open to hearing suggestions from Baker's Iraq commission? Isn't that trying to have it both ways?

The answer, of course, is that Snow redefines terms willy-nilly, approaching his job in a manner that is much more appropriate to cable television -- where the goal is to "win the half hour" -- than it is to the job of White House spokesman, which is at least ostensibly to explain policy to the American people.

Here's the transcript of Friday's briefing. Huffingtonpost.com has the seminal video clip .


<          3           >


© 2006 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive