Coverage all day Thursday on the cable news networks, as well as on the ABC and NBC evening newscasts, emphasized negative reaction to President Bush's plan for a “surge” of troops into Iraq. But the CBS Evening News delivered a markedly more negative presentation, even managing to raise Watergate and Monica Lewinsky. Katie Couric led: “If the early reaction to President Bush's new Iraq strategy is any indication, selling the American public on it could be a mission impossible.” She soon added: “The reviews of the speech last night were largely negative from the American public and Congress.”
Gloria Borger checked in with how Bush “sparked a bipartisan rebellion on Capitol Hill" as “some of the harshest criticism came from his own party." Couric then went to Bob Schieffer who, citing a CBS News poll showing no move in the public attitude toward Bush on Iraq, suggested “you really have to go back to Vietnam and Watergate to find presidential speeches on television that didn't give the President at least a little bump in the polls.” Schieffer recalled how “in the middle of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Bill Clinton went on television to give his State of the Union address. Even in the midst of that scandal, Mr. Clinton went up 16 points in the polls. Going on prime time TV and nothing changes, that is fairly extraordinary, Katie." Next, Couric characterized as “out of the ordinary” the “response the President got today from a usually receptive audience,” soldiers at Fort Benning. Jim Axelrod offered a dour assessment of the mood of the troops: “Even rallying the troops is now a challenge. The mood here was polite but muted, more somber than usual for a President talking to soldiers.”
Neither the ABC or NBC evening newscast stories on Thursday offered any such downbeat evaluation of the attitude of the troops toward Bush.
Highlights from the January 11 CBS Evening News:
Couric's tease:
“Tonight, the Commander in Chief fights his toughest battle yet. Can President Bush sell his new Iraq war strategy to the American people? Tonight, the results of a new CBS News poll. Meanwhile, in Congress, his plan is attacked, even by members of his own party.”
Senator Chuck Hagel: “The most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.”
Couric led:
“Hi, everyone. If the early reaction to President Bush's new Iraq strategy is any indication, selling the American public on it could be a mission impossible. But he set out to do that today. His first stop, a friendly audience, soldiers and their families at Fort Benning, Georgia. He told them America must succeed.”
President Bush, at Fort Benning: “It's a different kind of war in which failure in one part of the world could lead to disaster here at home.”
Couric: “The reaction was not at all what the President has come to expect from a military audience. We'll have more about that in a moment. And the reviews of the speech last night were largely negative from the American public and Congress. Tonight, a team of correspondents on the fallout, beginning with our national political correspondent, Gloria Borger. Gloria, Congress isn't exactly giving this plan a warm reception.”
Gloria Borger: “Katie, the President may have been trying to reignite support for his Iraq strategy, but instead, he sparked a bipartisan rebellion on Capitol Hill.”
Senator Chuck Hagel: “I think this speech, given last night by this President, represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam if it's carried out.”
Borger: “The President no doubt expected a fight with Democrats over Iraq, but after his speech, some of the harshest criticism came from his own party....”
After Borger's piece, Couric moved on to Bob Schieffer:
“It was a critically important speech the President gave last night but a CBS News poll found only one in three Americans actually watched it. Our Bob Schieffer was, of course, watching as he's watched so many presidential addresses. Bob, are you surprised the President isn't getting more support today?”Bob Schieffer: “Well, Katie, it is a rare evening when an American President goes on prime time television and doesn't change some minds, so you have to say last night was a rare evening. Mr. Bush did no better winning support for his new Iraq policy from the public than he did trying to change the minds of people in Congress. A CBS News poll conducted after the speech showed 68 percent of the people polled are still uneasy about the President's ability to make the right decisions about Iraq. That is the same percentage as when we asked the same question during the first week in January. The poll did show some increase in public support for increasing troop levels since last week, but even so, only 30 percent, a third of those polled, believe a troop increase is a good idea. The fact that this speech seemed to change so few minds, Katie, is really unusual. I think it underlines just how unpopular this war is with the American people.”
Couric: “And, Bob, are there historical precedents for this kind of public reaction or non-reaction?”
Schieffer: “Well, you really have to go back to Vietnam and Watergate to find presidential speeches on television that didn't give the President at least a little bump in the polls. Let me just give you an example here. In the middle of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Bill Clinton went on television to give his State of the Union address. Even in the midst of that scandal, Mr. Clinton went up 16 points in the polls. Going on prime time TV and nothing changes, that is fairly extraordinary, Katie.”
Couric then went to Jim Axelrod:
“All right, Bob Schieffer in Washington, Bob, as always, thanks so much. Also out of the ordinary is the response the President got today from a usually receptive audience, those soldiers we mentioned earlier. Here's our Chief White House correspondent Jim Axelrod.”Jim Axelrod: “To start selling his plan, President Bush picked about the friendliest audience he could find -- soldiers at Fort Benning, Georgia.”
President Bush: “And it's going on to require sacrifice and I appreciate the sacrifices our troops are willing to make.”
Axelrod: “But even rallying the troops is now a challenge. The mood here was polite but muted, more somber than usual for a President talking to soldiers. Perhaps because a surge means some of these troops will deploy to Iraq for their fourth or fifth tours and some will go in March, months earlier than expected. In a poll published this week in the Military Times, more service members disapproved of the President's handling of the war than approved, the first time that's happened.”
Bush at Fort Benning: “They're going to have a well-defined mission. I hear people say there must be a clear military mission. That's what the military people have said to me.”
Axelrod: “Former Joint Chiefs Chairman Richard Myers say it may take longer than usual but the troops will support the surge.”
Myers: “People will get used to this and it will be -- it will be discussed among them, and then I think you'll find the enthusiasm for all this will increase.”
Axelrod: “While the President thanked those most directly affected by the surge, his Secretary of Defense addressed questions about it in Washington -- addressed, not answered. How long might the surge be?”
Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense: “It's viewed as a temporary surge. But I think no one has a really clear idea of how long that might be.”
Axelrod: “The President's aides know that selling this new way forward requires more than just the right photo-op or applause line. One senior official told me today, opinions will change only when people see results.”
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center





Schieffer: “Well, you really have to go back to Vietnam and Watergate to find presidential speeches on television that didn't give the President at least a little bump in the polls. Let me just give you an example here. In the middle of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Bill Clinton went on television to give his State of the Union address. Even in the midst of that scandal, Mr. Clinton went up 16 points in the polls. Going on prime time TV and nothing changes, that is fairly extraordinary, Katie.”














Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I just don't get it. Story...
January 11, 2007 - 21:34 ET by Clear thinkerI just don't get it. Story... after story... after story... has declared the presidents plan DOA. Not only does the liberal MSM push everyone to pooh-pooh the troop surge idea, but they also seem to want our president to go on national TV and tell the world "WE LOST".
I'm so sick of the media rooting for the enemy that my sarcastic claims of our media working for the enemy, no longer sounds like sarcasm. For once I would like to see a major media outlet say "we can do this!"
Why is it that so few see how dangerous the middle east becomes if we fail?
God bless our troops! WE CAN DO THIS!
Can President Bush sell his
January 11, 2007 - 21:56 ET by JDWCan President Bush sell his new Iraq war strategy to the American people?
The old dem plan was attack. The new plan is lose ie cut and run. Why isn't CBS interested?
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Liberals
January 11, 2007 - 22:17 ET by iveseenitallThe liberals hate President Bush for reasons too numerous to mention here. Suffice to say they do. When liberals dislike you, they can make your life tough. If liberals hate you, they become obsessed. There is absolutely nothing you can do to change their minds. Their hatred can come from something as simple as your being proven right, your being smarter or better at something--a thousand reasons. And when they know they are wrong or inferior,or if they lose two elections in a row, they don't try to make things better, they attack. At that point ,consequences be damned. Nothing is beyond them, from lying , to cheating, to worse. It's a sickness. The libs are out of their minds with hatred of the President, just as they were with President Nixon. A loss in Iraq, no matter what the consequences, is their Prozac. Nothing else will calm them down. And that's only part of why I say...
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
MSM Not In It To Win It
January 12, 2007 - 01:27 ET by emjem24When I see all the backlash about Pres. Bush's speech my heart grows heavy. As a military spouse, I've cried over this. Someone my husband used to work with lost her husband in Iraq and she told me that she believed in what her husband was doing over there. The MSM has lost sight of that. It's all about "Bush lied, thousands died" and that this is the worst military blunder since Vietnam (Chuck Hagel RINO extraordinaire). I'm heartsick at how ignorant both the media and the public are. Neither have the commitment to take care of themselves or defend this country. The media's view is that attack is the best track and for the American public it's about jobs, healthcare, saving social security, etc. I don't recognize this country anymore. What happened to our patriotism, our support for the military, our belief in wiping out terrorists? Why have the American public turned into a bunch of surrender monkeys? It's disheartening and the American public don't yet get it that their opposition and turning their backs has badly affected the military and spouses like me. The American public have stopped caring about their own country and military and it's disheartening to see. Who will save us? How will we ever turn this around? If it wasn't for my fellow NB members, I'd lose all hope.
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
I often get depressed too.
January 12, 2007 - 01:35 ET by terrigI was saying today regarding the Rosie post that it's making me sick the way they carry on about the "poor troops" when in reality they wouldn't give them the time of day. I don't know what is wrong with the MSM. However, there are other spouses like me and generally a great bunch of people here who feel the same way you do. I got a letter yesterday from the mother of one of our friends who died in Iraq in October. I had told her I had some pictures of Mark from our rehearsal and wedding as well as some from two balls that when we get back to the mainland I would like to send if she was interested. She said she was. They live near SF and feel hopeless and are tired of the "well meaning" people who tell her that Mark died in vain. I don't know. I hate to think it would take another terrorist attack to wake up a lot of these people but not even sure that would do anything. Take heart, you are not alone.
terrig,That is so sad. I work
January 12, 2007 - 09:03 ET by msh1973terrig,
That is so sad. I work with a man who lost his son in Afghanistan two years ago. He himself served in Vietnam, his father served in WWII, his father served with the T. R. and the Rough Riders (not sure of the spelling). This is a family who have served their County with honor. Setting on his desk is a picture of another son with President Bush, who is serving in Iraq. These brave families get it. If only the libs and Dems got it. Thank you for service!
the enemies with-in
January 12, 2007 - 04:39 ET by foolnomorenews people ,papers,they are working overtime to keep us divided an mislead for what reason I'll never know!! I thought this was the united states??
Bless and support All the troops-Liberalism is a mental disorder!!
I have hope. I believe a great backlash is developing here.
January 12, 2007 - 08:06 ET by acaiguanaI have hope. I believe a great backlash is developing here.
I do not see the posters here throwing up their hands and saying, "Let's quit." Thanks.
I see a great resolve forming. I see the Liberals every day exposed for the twaddle they have spewed over the past 6 years. Bush is illigitimate (they really hate him on that idea alone); Bush is incompetent (now they are being asked to actually put substance behind their citicism of his plan - like, "Um... what's your plan?"); Rice doesn't have children (a backhanded slur on all Americans who do not have children); Culture of Corruption (oops, can't even get that one through the Senate); Minimum wages are more important than the War on Terror (oops, can't even get that one through the Senate); Cheney likes to kill (of course he is a 'chickenhawk' who didn't serve - but what the hey, it's a Democrat talking point); Bush needs to listen to the Generals (oops, the Generals screwed up).
The list is endless.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
Clinton's bounce
January 12, 2007 - 13:26 ET by Gary HallOn Clinton's bounce vs. Bush's slide. Just might have something to do with the fact that Clinton had the MSM cheerleading him on, as opposed to not being able to even hint that they'd like Bush to be successful with something. Heck, they haven't even rooted him on for his historic $15 billion Aids package.