I have not commented on the now infamous exchange between President George Bush and Virginia Senator-elect Webb, mainly because it seems that all of what I have read about the incident has come via partisan sources. To my knowledge, no one who observed the incident has commented so I’ve been content to let the rest of the blogsphere talk amongst themselves about it.
But today, Bryan J. Scrafford alerts us to some additional information he ran across on the Daily Kos. I know, partisan site, but stay with me for a minute. In the diary, the writer talks about an encounter he had with Congressman Jim Moran. In the conversation, Moran says that Bush knew about the incident in which Webb’s son was almost killed. Think Progress contacted Moran’s office and confirmed the conversation.
Now if this is the case, Bush’s behavior is absolutely despicable and Webb did the right thing in response.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
What a stupid and dishonest thing to say, Ward.
There you go again.
MB —
How is what Ward said stupid and dishonest? That is exactly how many of us are viewing this exchange.
Also, what gives you credibility to talk about the GOP? Are you in the party? Do you know what Republicans are thinking? When was the last city committee you attended?
Yea, thought so.
It’s stupid and dishonest in that it presumes the rest of the world is going to get drawn into a debate which is somewhat akin to debating whether the earth is round. Why in the hell would anyone even pay attention to you? The problem is that there hasn’t been *enough* calling out of GOP talking points as stupid and dishonest. Being deferential or respectful of GOP stupidity and dishonesty is what got us in this mess.
But if you need more detail (and I’m beginning to see that you may):
1) It’s dishonest in that it skips the key point – the rude part wasn’t in asking how his son was, it’s was the “That’s not what I asked.” Any person who isn’t carrying partisan water who reads the whole exchange is pretty clear on who the asshole is. It’s funny, though, how that bit keeps getting dropped in Republican discussion of it. Perhaps you’re all thinking that if George Will can do it, so can you. Go ahead. It makes you all dishonest, then. Shocker.
2) The stupidity of it comes in expecting anyone besides your own kool-aid drinking crowd to not see it as exactly what it is – dishonest and desperate spin. Really, you just look silly, being so obsessed with Webb before he’s cast a single vote. First he’s really a conservative, and then he’s a hothead, and next . . . well, I’m sure you’ll come up with something. But don’t expect people to refrain from laughing at you. Which is exactly what you deserve, thus far.
~
As to my credibility to speak on Republicans? Heh, it’s only based on what I see and hear. But I’d venture to guess that it’s a fair sight better than your credibility to speak on Democrats.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Bush’s response, “That’s not what I asked.” If said in one tone, it is bad; if in another, it is good.
Since none of us were there, we must put into it the tone we attribute to Bush. Bush haters will put on it a bad tone; Bush supporters will put on it a good tone. We all know that MB is a hater.
Let me see: 18 comments (not including mine) on a conversation between Bush and Webb that none of us witnessed, but only one on predatory lending legislation.
Is that the state of the VA blogsphere? If it is, then that’s sad, really sad.
As an American citizen Sen. Webb can answer the POTUS in any way he sees fit and furthermore, he and he alone, has the right to decide how the question was asked. Sen. Webb alone has the ability to guage whether the question was sincere, an attempt to establish who was boss, or it may be that Sen. Webb like many other people has decided that the phoney “folksey” bit is played and insincere.
GWB is a man not a god. And he is a man who – afterall – works for the people.
If anyone should be lectured on how to behave I would start with f^&k you Cheney and then we can discuss suggesting poisoning a sitting Supreme Court justice, blowing up Coit Tower in San Francisco and see just who has the “bad manners” market cornered.
So dry those crocodile tears and get on with destroying the country – time’s a wastin’!
I find your nom de plume rather amusing. I cannot recall any left-wing speakers’ having pies thrown at them, or of their having the stage stormed by right-wing radicals, or of their being shouted down by such right-wing radicals.
Did the Brooks Brother’s riots of 2000 escape you? Or perhaps when the Young Repbulican storm troopers manhandled the demonstrators at Columbia. Maybe you’ll remember this one; mouthpiece Melanie Morgan referring to the target between Nancy Pelosie’s “laughing” eyes or the Anchor Baby Malkin fan who thought he would impress her (the same way John Hinckly thought he’d impress Jody Foster) by sending white powder to Jon Stewart, Letterman, Keith Olbermann and others. Or maybe the way the Republicon spokesperson mAnn Coulter mused that perhaps Timothy McVeigh (another right wing HERO) bombed the wrong building. I believe she suggested the NYTimes building.
So, wipe that cool whip off your face, dry your eyes, wipe your nose and being such a whimp.
MB,
First I’ve never thought Webb was “really a conservative” and I’ve always thought he was a hothead.
If it wasn’t for your snarkiness over my opinion (calling me stupid and dishonest) I’d almost (I said almost) agree with some of the lefitst interpretation of this event.
But nothing can change the fact that 1) Webb WENT to the White House with an attitude, 2) Webb WENT to the White House and purposefully avoided the host (yes, I know it’s the people’s White House, but as long as GWB is the President he is also the host), and 3) that there was nothing wrong with the initial question.
In fact the initial question was quite kind and caring.
Could both men have handled it differently? Probably.
But what is really stupid and dishonest in this is implying that Webb had no responsibility for the tone of the exchange or that he was the one wronged.
I am actually surprised that Vibian drinks the Daily Kos Kool-aide and would then reprint it here.
The moment you said Kos, it has no unbias creadiblity.
And lets not get into an argument of who is an ass-hole between ANYONE and Webb. He prides himself on it, and you people nominated him becuase of it.
And NLS, we get it, you said it first. “Hoo-hoo, tell ’em Fred, I’ve done it all” You sound like Howard Stern, NLS… Get over yourself.
Two people can report the same info. You don’t get to squat info in the Blogosphere just becasue you read it and reported it “first.”
Ward, I agree with points #2 and #3.
I disagree with #1. My read is that Webb went to the event with the express purpose of meeting his new colleagues in congress in a non-work related environment. This reception reminds me of a typical mixer that you might find at a university sponsored event for incoming college freshmen.
Unlike your typical meet and greet party the food was paid for by tax-payers, the House did not actually belong to the Host (but was on temporary loan), and the Senator-Elect was not invited because he and the Host enjoyed a long-standing personal relationship, or even an employer-employee relationship. The usual “guest-host” analogies that we think of, simply fall apart when applied to Federal Washington, DC.
I’m also curious to know: When did receiving lines become part of the American political tradition? I can understand these at weddings, funerals, debutante balls, and meet and greets with royalty, but I have a sneaking suspicion that our Founding Fathers would have looked on this tradition skeptically.
JPTERP,
I spent 8 years in DC planning meetings and conventions. There are literally hundreds of locations in Washington to hold non-hosted “mixers.”
No, the White House doesn’t belong to George Bush. But he is the elected representative of the people to live there and host there.
Protocol dictates that the guests should go through the receiving line. It futher dictates that conversation in the receiving line be very limited. Again, if Webb had followed the protocol, it is likely that this exchange would never have taken place.
I thought it might be good therapy for the Allen supporters to vent over the loss of their flawed candidate. However, now that they are attacking Jim Webb with selective editing and revisionist portrayals of his encounter with G. W. Bush, I am compelled to challenge them.
The only person who was boorish and confrontational was Bush.
The President had been briefed to be sensitive to the fact that Lance Corporal Jimmy Webb very recently escaped death in the hostile Anbar province in Iraq. (Unfortunately, three other young Marines died next to Corporal Webb.) Senator Elect Webb made the choice to not have his picture taken with President Bush; it was Bush who searched out Webb. If you grant that the President’s clumsy (I find “your boy” objectionable) phrasing of “How’s your boy” was sincere, you must also grant that the polite “I’d like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President” was equally sincere. With full knowledge of Webb’s concern for the life of his son, Bush confronted Webb and impertinently shot back “That’s not what I asked. How’s your boy?” This lack of empathy and tact demeaned only one person, President Bush, and one office, that of the Presidency. If the President’s only parental concern is having his own Secret Service-protected children thrown out of Argentina for bad behavior, Bush’s lack of understanding of the feelings of the father of a combat Marine is understandable. It may not be forgivable.
Webb’s reply, “That is between me and my boy, Mr. President,” was far more “Virginia Gentlemanly” an answer than this ill-mannered, fake Texas cowboy deserved, and I commend our next great Senator for his self-control.
No disagreement, Charles.
Ward, I think there’s something wrong with the protocol. An American president isn’t royalty (thankfully). It’s just as conceivable to me that GWB would ask the same set of inappropriate questions to the Senator-Elect in the receiving line. Perhaps the Senator-Elect avoided GWB, because he knew by reputation that GWB would inadvertently say something either incredible mindless, or simply flat out offensive.
Maybe the Senator-Elect was concerned that GWB would talk with food in his mouth, or that GWB would give his wife a back rub. I don’t know.
Obivously a person’s attitude towards the president is going to color their perception of the exchange.
Incidentally, in 1994 another military father Hubert Shugart, refused to shake Bill Clinton’s hand when his son, Gary, was award a posthumous Congressional Medal of Honor for his service in Somalia. My view of that incident is similar to this one. As a president, when you send a parent’s child into war, you better expect that you are going to get some strong emotional reactions from parents. This just comes with the terrority. All things considered, I think that the Senator Elect exercised tremendous restraint.