White House Scripts
Presidents Past Inspire Bush's Damage Control
By Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 25, 2005;
In such a time of trouble, the overall challenge for Bush, according to Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, is to "keep energy in the executive" and focus on the president's larger second-term goals, such as spreading democracy in the Middle East. The risk, he said, is getting consumed by the bad news of the moment.
"If you look at Reagan who had two [failed Supreme Court] nominees, who lost control of the Senate and had Iran-contra, did he still have a successful final three years? Absolutely," Mehlman said in an interview. So, too, will Bush, he predicted. "One of the great strengths of this team has been from the beginning their ability to keep their eye on the big picture and long-term [goals], while also dealing with short-term challenges."
Though less eager to talk about it, Republican advisers also have studied the Clinton strategy for surviving the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment that followed. Throughout that crisis, Clinton regularly fell back on the message that he was focused on his duties even if everyone else in Washington was absorbed by scandal, an approach aides credited with helping save his presidency.
Consciously or not, Bush seemed to echo that line last week in the Rose Garden when he was asked about all the problems afflicting his White House. Dismissing all the "background noise," Bush said, "the American people expect me to do my job, and I'm going to."
"I think I've heard that one before," Mark Fabiani, a former Clinton White House lawyer, said with a laugh yesterday. "But it comes down to the person. Anybody can deliver the line. The question is: Can you compartmentalize these issues so they don't consume you? And I think Bush's job is more difficult than Clinton's because the questions here go right to the heart of the presidency."
As a chief of staff under Clinton, Leon E. Panetta heard that line before, too. "It's probably in a book someplace in the White House for when you get in trouble," he said. "It's under 'Scandal' and 'Big Trouble.' " But while it's the right thing to say, he said, "if you've ever worked in a White House, you know damn well it's not background noise. It's affecting everything you do as president."
By Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 25, 2005;
In such a time of trouble, the overall challenge for Bush, according to Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, is to "keep energy in the executive" and focus on the president's larger second-term goals, such as spreading democracy in the Middle East. The risk, he said, is getting consumed by the bad news of the moment.
"If you look at Reagan who had two [failed Supreme Court] nominees, who lost control of the Senate and had Iran-contra, did he still have a successful final three years? Absolutely," Mehlman said in an interview. So, too, will Bush, he predicted. "One of the great strengths of this team has been from the beginning their ability to keep their eye on the big picture and long-term [goals], while also dealing with short-term challenges."
Though less eager to talk about it, Republican advisers also have studied the Clinton strategy for surviving the Monica S. Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment that followed. Throughout that crisis, Clinton regularly fell back on the message that he was focused on his duties even if everyone else in Washington was absorbed by scandal, an approach aides credited with helping save his presidency.
Consciously or not, Bush seemed to echo that line last week in the Rose Garden when he was asked about all the problems afflicting his White House. Dismissing all the "background noise," Bush said, "the American people expect me to do my job, and I'm going to."
"I think I've heard that one before," Mark Fabiani, a former Clinton White House lawyer, said with a laugh yesterday. "But it comes down to the person. Anybody can deliver the line. The question is: Can you compartmentalize these issues so they don't consume you? And I think Bush's job is more difficult than Clinton's because the questions here go right to the heart of the presidency."
As a chief of staff under Clinton, Leon E. Panetta heard that line before, too. "It's probably in a book someplace in the White House for when you get in trouble," he said. "It's under 'Scandal' and 'Big Trouble.' " But while it's the right thing to say, he said, "if you've ever worked in a White House, you know damn well it's not background noise. It's affecting everything you do as president."
posted by Flimsy Sanity @ 8:00 AM
1 Comments:
At 12:48 AM,
Anonymous said…
Flimsy, one of the least endearing attributes of this Administration is that it seeks to "redefine" and "repackage" issues rather than deal with them. Its failures on most aspects of any issue are left unmentioned while focus is diverted to some minor area of success. Or it attributes failures to hostile media and opposition party attack rather than to its own ineptitude and dishonesty. Clinton's failings and those of Reagan and Bush are different orders of experience. The latter two dealt with the very nature of the Presidency. The former committed tasteless acts of a nature which should have been of more interest to his wife than the rest of us. And, as has been frequently pointed out, Clinton's "sin" did not lead to war and death. Americans have demonstrated an amazing willingness to forgive all in the past -- but they do expect to hear an owning up to responsibility and a recognition of wrong-doing by the perpetrators. Mr. Bush's policy of never confessing to error is not standing him in good stead. Nor should it.
Post a Comment
<< Home