Three weeks ago, when Republican Senator John Warner suggested a withdrawal of about 5,000 U.S. forces from Iraq by Christmas, the networks trumpeted the idea as evidence of a major “turning point” in the war. Thursday night, President Bush announced he would, in fact, lower U.S. troop levels by 5,700 by Christmas, but those same networks were dissatisfied, with NBC’s Tim Russert grumbling that the President’s idea was really “U.S. military involvement in Iraq this year, next year, and well after I leave the presidency.”
As MRC’s Brent Baker noted back on August 23, Warner’s suggestion of a small withdrawal was met with giddy excitement: “CBS’s Katie Couric touted a ‘major blow tonight to President Bush’s Iraq policy’ and ABC’s Martha Raddatz saw a ‘stunning announcement that could have a powerful effect on the war’ as the NBC Nightly News, for the fifth time in two years, heralded a ‘turning point’ against the war.”
But during their live coverage of the President’s Thursday night speech, the networks were hardly pleased that Bush had basically taken Warner’s suggestion. CBS’s Couric called it a “limited” withdrawal, “not enough of a reduction to satisfy critics,” while NBC’s Williams emphasized how “the plan would remain in place, with a large robust U.S. force.” ABC’s George Stephanopoulos saw the speech as “a mixed message,” with some troops coming home, but also that “America is going to be in Iraq and in the region for a very long time.”
Here’s more on how the three broadcast networks reacted to the President’s decision to begin lowering troop levels in Iraq.
# On CBS, just before the speech began:

Katie Couric: "Good evening, everyone. President Bush is about to give what amounts to a state of the war address. It's his eighth prime time address to the nation about the situation in Iraq. This time, he'll announce a troop withdrawal — a limited one that will begin this month and bring 5,700 troops home by Christmas. By next summer, troops would be back to about pre-surge levels. Not enough of a reduction to satisfy critics, and after the President speaks we'll bring you the Democratic response."
Bob Schieffer: "He'll talk about bringing home some troops, but he's not backing away. In fact, he will talk tonight about a long-term military committment to Iraq that goes far beyond his own presidency."
# On ABC, immediately following the President’s address:
George Stephanopoulos: “Charlie, this was a first for the President — the first time in four and a half years of war that he announced that troops are coming home. He was also less confrontational than he’s been in the past with Congress, but fundamentally, Charlie, the President was delivering a mixed message tonight. He said troops are going to start to come home, but America is going to be in Iraq and in the region for a very long time.”
Charles Gibson: “He has used, did use today, the Korean model, where there have been American troops stationed for so many years. That he foresees as a possibility, indeed a probability, in Iraq.”
# On NBC, immediately after the President finished speaking:
Williams: "His eighth Oval Office speech on the war, the President tonight embracing the plan that would begin the first drawdown of U.S. fighting soldiers from Iraq, in this case Marines, actually. The plan would remain in place, with a large robust U.S. force."
Russert: "The President has drawn the line, and he's saying, 'No matter a majority of Congress, or a majority of the American people want to disengage, I have decided there will be U.S. military involvement in Iraq this year, next year, and well after I leave the presidency. Democrats, your move.'"
—Rich Noyes is Research Director at the Media Research Center.





















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Ten Second Tom
September 14, 2007 - 12:29 ET by KC MulvilleThere's a character in the Adam Sandler movie "50 First Dates" called Ten Second Tom, who completely forgets everything after ten seconds. His mind is completely swiped clean every ten seconds. That's our media: ten second Tim.
It's not just Russert. It's the whole media. They claim that the administration doesn't know what the mission is in Iraq, and when we can bring the troops home. Petraeus spends hours detailing the rationale for the mission, and the numbers that support his recommendations. Crocker is widely regarded as the best expert on that part of the world, and he testifies in exact detail about why he recommends what he does. Bush goes on national television to explain the current situation. What do the media do? They re-ask the same question that has been thoroughly answered, and present it as if they never heard anything. When can we bring troops home?
The evidence is in: either they can't grasp what the administration is telling them (which should disqualify them from discussing real-world issues), or these people are simply deaf.
Hi, I'm Tim
September 14, 2007 - 17:26 ET by drillanwrHi, I'm Tim ...
Makes you wonder about a certain segment of the population who constantly bring to mind movies, movie characters, and movie quotes ...
Stranger than fiction ... And TOO twisted for color TV ...
Hi, I'm Tim ...
LOL
September 14, 2007 - 18:33 ET by KC MulvilleSometimes I get really angry at these guys, but then sense returns, and I have more fun laughing. For almost every media event, I can picture the closing credits and music of Benny Hill, when they all chase each other through the streets. That's the media covering a story.
Yeah, they seem to think
September 14, 2007 - 19:03 ET by drillanwrYeah, they seem to think that loud droning hum in their heads is a sound track ...
announcement that could have a powerful effect on the Dim Dems
September 14, 2007 - 15:44 ET by JayTeeThe Troop withdrawal is Good, then it's BAD, and it all depends on Who said it..... ?
Where am I living ? Is this Budapest ? I'm shocked at the obvious Bias of the Talking heads on the alphabet Nutworks.
America has a long history of loving/embracing and electing Generals to the Presidency...From Washington, Grant, to Eisenhower....WE love success, We love Generals, and it is a FATAL mistake for the Congress turds that slammed Petraus.
Hillary went a bridge too far.......and it's going to collaspe on her.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
Brilliant - nailed it. (;~>
September 14, 2007 - 17:40 ET by Gary HallBrilliant - nailed it.
(;~> gh
It's their job to tell us what to think
September 14, 2007 - 19:13 ET by mattmThat's what they seem to think, anyway.
BTW Is it just me, or is Russerts face imploding? (Sorry about that, but I'm feeling a bit giddy in the afterglow of Bush's speech seeing as how he has Al Qaeda on the ropes, the Dems in a corner and the media in a state of confusion - all the while being the dumbest man ever to be president!)
Note to Tim: Your paraphrase: 'No matter a majority of Congress, or a majority of the American people want to disengage (unsubstantiated), I have decided there will be U.S. military involvement in Iraq this year, next year, and well after I leave the presidency. Democrats, your move.'
This is known as leadership.