I watched Bush's performance at the
NATO convention, and tried to note catch words. I also have this nagging need to look for reporters asking soft questions, questions which Bush looks uncharacteristically relaxed when answering. I popped a comment into
Meteor Blades diary about Bush's Excellent European Adventure, but wanted to draw a little more of a spotlight onto this, hence the diary. Because catch words were easy to, err, catch, and one question seemed particularly simplistic. See if you agree.
First of all, today's NATO news conference was brought to you by the letters F, U, and W AND by the words "Contribution"(11 times), "Vital"(9 times), and "Commitment/Relationship"(19 times). These were brief statements, these were definitely today's power words. The focus, of course, on how America's Commitment to its Relationship with NATO is incumbant upon the other countries "Vital Contributions." Pretty straight forward, and he is effusively "Grateful" quite often.
There is also a veiled threat that these "Contributions" must continue, OR ELSE:
I appreciate so very much the transformation of NATO that's taking place. In order for NATO to be vital it's got to be relevant and if it stays stuck in the past it's slowly but surely going to fade into oblivion but it's not staying stuck in the past.
Follow us into our vision of the future, OR 'fade into oblivion.' I wonder what choice NATO will come to.
After being smacked around by two questions which tested his pitiable limitations, Bush suddenly perked up when asked what seemed to me an unnaturally simple question.
Q: Some of the contributions on Iraq involve only a few people, modest amounts of money. Is this going to be enough, or is it largely symbolic?
President Bush: Now, you know, first of all, when you look around the table, Steve, that you see countries that have made enormous contributions and the biggest contribution of all is when they've sent a person into combat and that person lost their life. That is a significant contribution. And the United States of America is grateful for those contributions. And we honour every life.
The key is to make sure that those lives that were lost don't go down in vain, that a free and democratic and peaceful country emerges. Every contribution matters. Twenty-six nations sitting around that table said it's important for NATO to be involved in Iraq. It's a strong statement. And NATO is involved in Iraq, and NATO is doing a vital mission, which is to help an officer corps emerge.
The truth of the matter is, in order for Iraq to be a secure country there has to be a chain of command that is effective and works. So that commands go from a political body to a military. And the military commands goes down so that people enact the orders in order to keep the people safe. That is what has to happen and NATO is providing an officer training mission which is vital.
Every contribution matters. And every country ought to be proud of the fact that they're contributing to the world's newest democracy. This organization is an organization that's based upon values. Values that have stood the test of time. Values that are universal. And values that are necessary for the world to be peaceful. And the contributions made into Iraq are based upon those values. And I am grateful.
Sorry to print that in full, but I think it is important to see how many times he is able to cram his catch words in during this VERY SMOOTHLY DELIVERED reply: "Contributions" + "Vital" = 10, "Values" rears up with 5 mentions (this appears to be an American journalist, hence "Values" probably holds more sway with his audience, I believe). The thing I noticed, besides the fact that the question made little sense other than as a set-up, was that Bush did not sweat or stutter during this reply. The reporter was soft-spoken, didn't identify himself or his organization, and appeared to be reading these two lines off of a notebook. This following Bush's earlier halting responses.
While answering his first question about the EU selling weapons to China, Bush appeared completely lost:
Well, I talked about this issue with President Chirac last night, and Prime Minister Blair, and I intend to talk about here in a couple of hours...
Ummm, I dunno, he added. He furthered his statement with a pause where <tinfoil>he either mumbled to himself in tongues OR was coached in some way to include the term "very constructive":
But it was an important dialogue. It was a very open dialogue. There's no...(GARBLED MUMBLE) very constructive. And so they will... as I understand it, and I don't want to put words in people's mouth, but I am told that there is a... they've heard the concerns of the United States...
Still no clue what he's answering. My speakers are blown, but there appears to be audio
audio of this exchange on the NATO website. Maybe someone can pick it out better than I could with TIVO alone?</tinfoil>
Finally, no Bush Press Conference is complete without a small example of the completely stupid things he says. Aside from what is above:
And I've been listening, and you might call this a listening tour. That people have got things on their mind and they want me to hear it, and part of what they've got on their mind is the dialogue taking place with China and the European Union.
Q: I'm Laurent Zecchini from Le Monde. Mr. President, about a week ago in Munich we have had the old and the new Rumsfeld...
President Bush: (Laughs)...
Q: ...but the thing is... the thing is...
President Bush: Same old Bush.
The major issue that irritate a lot of Europeans was Iraq. I understand that. You know, I can figure it out. And the key now is to put that behind us. And to focus on helping the new democracy succeed. It's in our interest.
Oh, silly Europeans, let's just put it ALL behind us now, like our disagreements never happened, like Iraq is the success I say it is. There, there, have a sip of Kool-Aid. Mmmm...
