Tony Snow tries to pop the bubble

Tony Snow is breaking new ground this year, becoming the first White House press secretary to step out from behind the podium and hit the campaign trail. Yesterday, this week, Snow shared some interesting insights at a fundraiser in Wisconsin.

Unfortunately for Snow, his comments reflected the soft bigotry of low expectations.

President Bush is smarter than his critics think, Bush’s chief spokesman said Thursday.

Speaking at a state Republican Party fund-raiser, presidential press secretary Tony Snow sought to dispel the image of an out-of-touch president who listens only to those who agree with him, as portrayed in journalist Bob Woodward’s new book, “State of Denial.”

“He’s perfectly aware of the polls, but you know what he’s more aware of? His job,” which Bush sees as making America “safer and better,” Snow said.

Snow said Bush questioned aides closely to learn all sides of an issue because he knows “you can’t be living in a dream world” as president.

And Snow assured the audience of faithful GOP backers, “If you ever have even the tiniest bit of doubt whether the president is engaged, don’t worry – he is.”

There are at least two things wrong with this. First, Snow is hardly doing Bush a favor by public assuring a partisan audience that, public doubt notwithstanding, Bush is “engaged” and “aware.” Is this what the Bush defense has come to? He’s not competent or capable, but never fear, he’s almost always conscious while handling his presidential responsibilities.

And second, Snow’s insistence that “you can’t be living in a dream world” as president is true, but also makes this president look pretty bad.

There’s this gem from last year, for example.

It’s a standing joke among the president’s top aides: who gets to deliver the bad news? Warm and hearty in public, Bush can be cold and snappish in private, and aides sometimes cringe before the displeasure of the president of the United States…. Bush can be petulant about dissent; he equates disagreement with disloyalty.

Snow argued that Bush questions aides to learn all sides of an issue; he apparently neglected to mention that if you’re on the “wrong” side, the president doesn’t want to talk you anymore.

I’m also reminded of a Time interview with a “youngish” White House aide, described as a Bush favorite, who said, “The first time I told him he was wrong, he started yelling at me. Then I showed him where he was wrong, and he said, ‘All right. I understand. Good job.’ He patted me on the shoulder. I went and had dry heaves in the bathroom.”

There’s also Blake Gottesman, the president’s “body guy,” who stuck close behind Bush for 14 to 18 hours a day before recently stepping down to go to college. Gottesman recently offered an interesting perspective into Bush’s temperament.

On the road [Gottesman will] crack a joke if Bush is getting tense.

“If the aide looks nervous, the President will think there’s something to be nervous about,” Gottesman, who is intensely private even for a Bushie, tells TIME in a rare interview. “So you look calm even when everything is going wrong.”

It was probably just an off-hand comment, but this struck me as a helpful peek into the president’s personality. No matter what the circumstances, Bush, who is apparently far more sensitive than he lets on, wants those around him to appear relaxed, even when they’re not, because our delicate president might otherwise get flustered.

Puttng these qualities together, the president doesn’t want to hear bad news, equates dissent with disloyalty, bullies people who suggest he may be wrong, and wants people around him to “look calm,” even when the circumstances don’t warrant it.

I agree with Snow that “you can’t be living in a dream world” as president. It’s one of the reasons the nation lost confidence in Bush a long time ago.

That guy is sure living up to his name – Snowjob. Is Bush giving him a pair of mink kneepads for that?

  • I wonder if Bush wakes up at 3 a.m. realizing that he is such a destructive incompetent.

    I keep thinking what a slap-in-the-face the appointment of Tony Snow was to real journalists. He represents the epitome of the pseudo-journalist which is aiding and abetting the Right Wing Noise Machine. Now the question of whether White House correspondents are real journalist either.

  • “If you ever have even the tiniest bit of doubt whether the president is engaged, don’t worry – he is.”

    Exactly the reason to worry. The greater the engagement, the greater the danger. When Bush says that “failure is not an option”, I agree. For Bush, failure is an inevitable certainty.

  • Way back in Feb 2003 an early CB snark was, “I know the president promised to “change the tone” in Washington, but I didn’t know that would mean silence. ” Now Bush is having a new conference every other day and still has nothing substantive to say. The more things change, as they say.

  • @4 Swan

    And of course on further paints Shrub as an addict. The sensitivity only flows one way. “Don’t hurt my feelings. Now hold still while I stomp all over yours.”

    And is it just me or is just plain wrong that a Press Sec. is campaigning? This should make it painfully obvious to any reporter who hasn’t caught on that the man’s proper title should be Presidential Mouthpiece. Or Propaganda Organ. Or 24k Dick.

    However, this may be another bit of Distracto-Vision (Executive Producer – Karl Rove). When he comes back reporters might be so busy asking about idiotic things he said they’ll forget to ask about the idiotic things his boss said.

  • “…you know what he’s more aware of? His job…”

    Hard to take this seriously so soon after The Daily Show’s “My job is…” montage.

  • Reminds me of Nixon vigorously shoving Ron Zeigler, his press secretary, to step up and engage with the press while Nixon slithered away.

  • Puttng these qualities together, the president doesn’t want to hear bad news, equates dissent with disloyalty, bullies people who suggest he may be wrong, and wants people around him to “look calm,” even when the circumstances don’t warrant it.

    But be honest, who would you rather have a beer with, him or Kerry?

    Sorry for the off-topic — I’ve just never seen a story about his personal qualities (even from his admirers!) that doesn’t make him look like an unpleasant fellow to interact with.

  • But be honest, who would you rather have a beer with, him or Kerry?

    Comment by Allen K.

    I can honestly say I would rather have a beer with Bush. The reason? Two words: Bar fight.

  • Bush who is apparently far more sensitive than he lets on…

    Valid from this Bushian prespective only:

    You are with him or you are against him, and he can acutely sense which one it is…

    Houston we have a problem here….

    Namely… B can sense that 95% of the non-American world and 75% of the American world are ridiculing him with malicious delight.

    Because of this I argue: B is on the razor thin edge of sanity.

    Remember his last news conference?
    Here is Josh’s sensing that razor’s edge…
    And O’hare over at Mark Kleiman’s place sensing it…
    And here even is KDrum getting a taste for our fumbling funabulist…

    My own take?

    Bush really is on the edge.
    His pycho-position right now is more precarious than Nixon’s… (Remember when Dick went walking the halls of the White House with a bottle of gin talking to portraits at midnight?)

    Never in my lifetime has the country seen such a sicko tottering towards the abyss…

    I will go out on the limb here:

    I think B is going to melt down.
    I think he will do something truly horrible before all this is over…

    The guy is dangerous…truly dangerous.

  • Koreyel makes a good point that Bush isn’t jst sensitive, he’s downright fragile. The diference between him being somewhat even-keeled and off the deep end could be a subltle comment or the feelings his cohorts could be flustered. Not to break Godwin’s Law, but didn’t a ertain German leader whose last name begin with H exhibit similar emotional instability, flying into rages at the slighest disagreement or feeling of dissent?

    The phrase “Snow said Bush questioned aides closely to learn all sides of an issue,” betrays Snow’s argument. Relying only on his inner circle, who are aware of Bush’s thin ego, does not make for well-rounded discourse on issues of the day. Arguing that Bush gets the best information his little bubble can provide only further proves Bush isn’t willing to face the outside world in any meaningful way.

  • If one understands that Bush spends an enormous amount of physical and psychological energy just trying to hold everything together — as Dr. Justin Frank explains in “Bush on the Couch” — then a lot becomes clear.

  • As for Rove, I see a couple of cat-o-nine tails and fellatio in his immediate future.

    Frank Rich pulls the GOP out of the closet… and they look FAB-uloooooous!

    This is definitely one of his better ones.

  • @jurassicpork:S

    I guess the world is changing.

    This week: Gay as a republican.
    Next week: Gay as an authoritarian republican.
    Next, next week: Bush is gay.
    Next, next, next week: Big deal, so was Nero.

    (Im)moral of the story?
    Gay people can be just as evil and cruel as straight people.

    Moral of the story?
    Sexual persuasion is irrelevant.
    Time to move on.
    Time to grow up.
    This is the 21st century.

    End of story.

  • I try to think of Herr Bush as “the kinder, gentler version of Kim Jong Il”—but on a relative scale, they’re both mentally “beyond the great wah-zoo,’ and both dangerous….

  • Is Bush the worst piece of reichwing shit ever to darken the Oval Office?

    My goodness, it’s a silly question!

  • Reminds me, as usual, of the first debates between Bush and Gore, where everyone expressed their pleasure at the fact that Bush didn’t fall on his face. “See, Bush isn’t a blithering idiot! He’s a perfectly cromulent candidate!”

  • “Snow said Bush questioned aides closely to learn all sides of an issue because he knows “you can’t be living in a dream world” as president.”

    Boy George II: “What do the Democrats say we ought to do in Iraq?”

    Aide: “The Democrats say we ought to cut and run from Iraq.”

    BG2: “Well, what do Democrats say about bring democracy to the Arab world?”

    Aide: “Democrats say that the Arabs aren’t capable of handling democracy.”

    BG2: “Well, what to the Democrats say to do about terrorism?”

    Aide: “Democrats just want to wait until the Terrorists hit America again and treat the terrorist act like a crime.”

    Hence, I suppose, the BG2 tendency to prop up Strawman arguments. The poor boy is deluded by his aides.

    Mr. Snow, I would suggest that if the President wants to hear both sides of an argument, he would do better to listen to the people who actually hold the opposing views rather than ask his demonstrably incompetent staff to try to play God’s advocate (I was going to say Devil’s advocate but it’s pretty easy to see whose on Satan’s side here).

  • It looks like they have confused arrogant and tempermental with smart and authoritative. Maybe it is just me, but it seems like Bush’s nightmare is having to admit he is wrong (with CO2 environmental laws a close second). A decider should gather all the facts (the more diverse the better) and then analyze them, seek council, and then decide. Bush likes to decide then have people bring him reports that support his decision.

  • First, Snow is hardly doing Bush a favor by public assuring a partisan audience that, public doubt notwithstanding, Bush is “engaged” and “aware.” Is this what the Bush defense has come to? He’s not competent or capable, but never fear, he’s almost always conscious while handling his presidential responsibilities.

    That is reassuring. I was ready to remove the feeding tube.

  • Comments are closed.