Bush's Bloggers

President George Bush is getting desperate to get some good coverage, now that Tony "the Snowman" Snow has stepped down and the media might be saying bad things about his plans. He invited some friendly mil-bloggers into the White House to convince them to keep saying good things about his military strategery. I bet it was a tough sell. From the Washington Post:

"More and more we are engaging in the new-media world, and these are influential people who have a big following," said Kevin F. Sullivan, the White House communications chief.

Bush told the group that, to his knowledge, it was the first time a president had met with bloggers for a chat at the White House, one of the participants wrote. The blogs represented at the meeting are generally pro-Bush and pro-military, and the ensuing reports were highly sympathetic to the president.

"At this meeting President Bush came off as more comfortable with the message than I've seen him appear on TV or in speeches," wrote Carroll, a journalist and former Navy pilot. "No deer-in-the-headlights stuff here. Truly unwavering and passionate. Facts on the ground notwithstanding, he believes the United States can win the Iraq War. And to be honest, being around him made me believe it at that moment too."

Matthew Burden, a former Army officer who blogs under the name Blackfive, raved about how Bush slapped his hand and called him "brutha."

"The President was very intelligent, razor sharp, warm, focused, emotional (especially about his dad), and genuine," Blackfive wrote. "Even more so than this cynical Chicago Boy expected. I was overwhelmed by the sincerity -- it wasn't staged."

Yeah, nothing like bringing in the conservative mil-bloggers and gladhanding them, using the the Roosevelt Room and the exclusivity of the event to overawe the already-admiring gang. No question that the man has charisma and sincerity - it's his logic and honesty that we doubt. But who are we kidding? I'm just jealous I wasn't invited. But just like Stephen Colbert couldn't get President Bush to sign his wrist-cast, I'm sure that my invitation would be lost in the mail, too. Ah, well.

Comments

[Retired Army Guy]

I think you should wear the fact that you weren't invited proudly, as a badge of honor. I would. After all, a man is often judged by the company he keeps.

Years ago, during Watergate, a Secret Service guy I knew moved from protective service to the money side. When I asked him why, he gave me an enigmatic smile and allowed as how he thought he'd be more comfortable chasing counterfeiters.

[BGG]

Don't feel bad, it'll work both ways. After this, all presidents will feel compelled to do it and when there's a Democrat in the White House you'll get an invitation to come and fawn over her/him. ;)

[NVH]

You know RAG, I know plenty of USSS guys that did the same thing in the mid to late 90's for the exact reasons, and demurred just the same in their answers as well. You might get wholesale drop offs at that agency come '08 if we get a repeat of those years in office again.
J. his honesty is not to question either, logic yes, he's made mistakes, the buck stops at him, and he's comfortable being, wrong, just not saying so, or being confronted about it, and well, when you're in his position, you might say he's allowed to be that way. Just like Billary will be allowed to be a complete Bitch without question should she doom this country for another four years, enjoy that invitation though, I'll bet those cankles will sink nicely into the new carpet she lays down ( I mean munches up, sorry ) in the oval office.

[Grandjester]

NVH,

AKA "I got nothin' so I might as well be a dick"

C'mon man, are personal attcks on the Clinton all you got left? Your boy has royally screwed our pootch, but keep on cheerleadin'...

[BGG]

Yeah that was pretty bad NVH! The first paragraph was true but then you kind of went off the deep end...

[NVH]

The problem is that all SHE has is personal attacks on everyone else, that's all she has. Elect me b/c I'm the one who knows about all the skeletons in everyone else's closets, and room enough in my own to hang 'em. Seriously. When a guy like Wesley Clarke, a former SAC NATO, comes out saying she has the leadership skills to run this country, and just knowing the stories I know about her, even the discrete ones from the USSS, it makes me question the likes of Wesley Clarke, and for that matter, any General who comes out against the current admin offering the complete antithesis of what we should be doing. Don't these guys have the lee way while INSIDE to direct change, if not, then what kind of leader were they really? just accumulating points 'til they could run for office. Look at Greenspan. The guy gets done, writes a book, and says, in the book, not in interviews, that I disagreed with the president and how he did this and that. And people have a problem that he didn't bring it up then? Because he knew it wouldn't have done any good in the position he was in to voice personal matters of opinion that don't have anything to do with running the country. It's the DISCRETION that Dems don't have, and the VALOR part as well. And if they don't have it, then why should I have it when discussing our next CIC ( not that I have a problem with lesbians whatsoever ). As for being BAD, well, I've heard worse from both of you GJ, BGG. Jump up and down in place all you want, I rarely venture this far out, and well, see what it takes? As for screwing the pootch (sp?) GJ, at least he wasn't caught screwing something yet. Oh, I just can't resist can I? Did I swear too much on this one?

[Grandjester]

Yeah, why don't you tell me about the discretion of airport men's rooms or the valor in sending sexual emails to underage congressional pages?

Any suggestion that BGG or I have dismissed Bush as a Lezbo with Fat Ankles is more than bit off the mark. Try again.

[NVH]

Look you want to call out individual failings of each party member, g'head, let's start with that Loosiana boy Jefferson. Everybody's innocent 'til proven guilty, and well Clinton's been on the close side of guilty more often than most of the contender's so pick your poison, criminally non-convicted, or morally ambiguous, oh wait, you've got it all on the dems side. Hell, it's everywhere. Therefore, all our targets. My aim is true. Yeah, alright I'm done.

[Grandjester]

2 to 1

That's the ratio. For every Clinton blowjob, there is a Craig bathroom AND a Foley IM. For every Jefferson freezer of cash there is a Duke Cunningham gold shitter AND a Ted Stevens vacation home.

2 to 1

[bigfoot]

I think I'm done hanging out at Defensetech, just like I was done with Blackfive about two years ago.

[NVH]

EVERY Clinton BJ?

[BGG]

You've heard worse from me?

[bigfoot]

Someone could have at least asked Stephen Hadley, "Dude, what's up with the Sally Jesse Raphael eyeglasses?"

[John of Argghhh!]

Hey, guys. I wasn't expecting any more than I got from it.

If the next President Clinton makes the invite, I'll take it.

I spent an hour with the President (hey, I got coined, too) got to see Barney (a highlight, I admit) and I've got emails and contacts in the administration I didn't have before.

What's not to like?

Just like I'm on the veteran's and military affairs advisory council for my federal rep, Nancy Boyda (D-KS2), and through that contact, I have emails, phone numbers and contacts on that side of the aisle.

Mr. Bush is the President. Mrs. Boyda is my Representative in Congress. What, I'm supposed to ignore the people who act in my name if I didn't vote for them?

I don't think so.

And if we have another President Clinton in the next cycle, and the staff has a cranial infarct and invites me - I'll go, and I'll play nice.

And then I can listen to the right wing call me a sycophant.

I can live with it.

[Grandjester]

Welcome John, I have been ripping up the boards at DT and Mil.com, calling Ward out for being a ball-licker, nice of you to drop by and give us your view. None of us would have wiped with the drapes (well... most of us) and I can understand you wanting to play nice, but geez, tears? C'mon!

[John of Argghhh!]

Jester - *I* didn't cry. I wish others would do a little separating out here. The Greyhawk family reaction would have been a touch different had Greyhawk not been busy being deployed.

But I don't grudge Mrs. G. her emotion, either. Or anyone else out there, for that matter.

I just happen to think that a fair bit of the dissing going on is tinged with sour grapes, making no specific accusations about here, and noting that there are real twisted knickers on the right side of the 'sphere.

I just think it's bemusing that so many people will (at least until they get an invite) give up the chance of a lifetime over ideological purity.

We're *supposed* to be a polis, a cooperative form of governance that seeks consensus to common goals, though too many who blog (left or right)seem to demand a democracy, the tyranny of the mob ala the French Revolution and a stigmatizing of the opposing voice.

Not that I don't slip out of my nice-nice persona now and then, I do so far less often than I did before.

And that has resulted in... access. To amazing places and people, not just a lame duck President.

And be honest, if we'd come out of there saying anything other than "Huzzah! We talked him into pulling out!" or, "Bastard - he won't surrender and adopt Murtha's plan!" we weren't gonna get many props from the anti side, anyway.

So what's the point of trying to play to 'em?

Me, I plod along mostly to the right in the mushy muddle, working both sides of the fence. And ya know what? That's where *most* of the people are, too.

But we all live in bubbles, and it's really hard to see out.

[John of Argghhh!]

And Jester - what's the point of calling Ward a ball-licker?

Aside from scoring snark-points with your buddies?

Of course, since I frown on that behavior over at my place, we're not as entertaining, which is good. Keeps the trolls of both sides out of the woodwork.

[J.]

Hey John, nice to see you at the site. You'll have to pardon GJ, he is... ardent in his beliefs. I think the disappointment that we have in this Bush-blogger summit is that it appears that he's trying to shore up his rep with the conservative side by glad-handing you. If you're okay with being used to publicize the president, hey, who are we to argue? I don't think the Bush administration would find any rude behaviors from us left-oriented milbloggers, but they know they aren't going to benefit by our participation, so why bother? But at least the DefenseLink Blogger's Roundtable reaches out to both sides. I think we're looking for fairness and equity from the White House - not too much to ask, is it?

[John of Argghhh!]

For the most part, though not exclusively, there was one unifying theme of the invitees - in one way or another, we were involved, not just bloviating, but we were involved in things that directly benefitted the troops.

Sure, we're mostly supporters of the mission, though I know that Matt, Roggio, Ardolino and myself have all had criticisms of the conduct and planning, etc.

But *doing* something, either via deployment, embedding, or, like Matt and I, the "support the troops" fundraising and other things, seemed to be the common thread.

Not blind support for the President's policies, nor just being blowhards, though, lord knows, we all have done enough of that.

Remember that Mrs G. was standing in for the deployed Greyhawk.

It made sense to me.

I also think the White Communications people were running a test.

Do this, all under the rose until the event was over, let us loose, and then I think they've been tracking the spread of the story, to see just how much impact, at least via the web, the event had.

And you guys have *all* been participating in that.

I'm guessing at what their logic and criteria was - but I think it was intended to give props to people who have been generally supportive... is that really unexpected of a politician?

Is Hillary going into hostile venues to speak her bit? Not really. Is she inviting hostile voice to her stuff? No, not really. Nor are any of them, of either side.

This wasn't a published news event - I think for exactly that purpose, though I freely admit that I don't understand all the nuances of that stuff.

Nor, in some respects, do I care. I really do play both sides - because, like with Nancy Boyda, whether I chose her or not, she *is* my voice in the House. So why shouldn't I engage her?

But this was a test, and experiment, I think.

Let's face it, too - if there wasn't a war, there wouldn't have been an invite, either.

[Grandjester]

Sorry John, as one of the few who has supported Ward and Christian over at DT, and after reading Ward's puff piece over at Mil.com I feel that my indictment of "scrot sucking sycophancy" is right on the mark.

I don't know you, so my comments may not apply to you, but anything less than holding the Emperor responsible for the greatest foreign policy disaster of the modern era is folly. He has smashed Iraq and the US military like they were so many tinker-toys and his continued petulance costs American and Iraqi lives.

Your summation of "Hey he's the CinC and it was just tea and crumpets, so I should be polite (read: BALL LICKER)" ring hollow. Get over yourself and get over the Bush Man-crush, it is killing our country.

[Grandjester]

John,

Visited your blog. Middle? Hardly.

[John of Argghhh!]

Jester - no doubt you consider yourself mainstream, and I'm to the right of Attila the Hun, with just inches to spare from Adolf.

Yokay. I bow to your superior intellect, judgement, and acumen.