I wasn’t among them, in part because the president will only invite those whom he knows will then relay his message. The conversation was ‘off the record’ so the hosts who were invited are obligated to not give details of the instructions, er, conversation they had, but Hugh Hewitt makes it pretty clear what their marching orders were.
President Bush invited ten talk hosts into the Oval Office for an hour of conversation today –Glenn Beck, Bill Bennett, Neal Boortz, Scott Hennon, Laura Ingraham, Lars Larson, Mark Levin, Michael Medved, Janet Parshall and me. This was an off-the-record conversation, and so I won’t be quoting the president.
I will say on today’s show that I am confident about the course of the war and about the momentum in Iraq, as well of the president’s absolute commitment to doing right by the troops and his concern for every lost and wounded soldier and their families. President Bush’s command of the details and his broad view of the conflict is reassuring, and among my comments to him was the wish that he found more opportunities to engage in long interviews that would allow the American public to see that grasp and that commitment.
Personally, I’m committed to the fact that what I say to you each day is based on my observations and understanding of the events that surround us, regardless of where that assessment will take me. I lived far too long in the muck of the left, spouting positions and making arguments others wanted me to make. If I didn’t, I would be shunned. Those days are over. I think you, too, prefer knowing that you’re hearing an independent assessment, even if you disagree with it, from the radio talk show host you’re spending time with. At least you don’t have to figure out whose talking points I’m reciting.
I like everyone who had the sit-down with the president. I’m also disappointed with each and every one of them.
Do I fret about the fact that I’m not invited to meetings with the president, or invited to dinners and parties at the White House? No, not at all. Is it exciting and glamorous? Probably, but I am more concerned with whether or not you would invite me to your house for dinner.
UPDATE:
To get a sense of the nature of the person sitting in that room, here is WDAY’s Scott Hennen’s blog entry about the meeting. I’ve never met Scott but I’m sure he’s a great guy. But I must warn you– you may get a sudden urge for a cigarette and some small talk after reading his report. Please note that he indicates Rush and Sean had their own separate, private meeting with the president after he chatted up the more lowly hosts.
I’ve received quite a few emails from listeners and readers asking why I care about this. The reason is simple–I’m part of a medium which is strongest when independent. It’s simply more difficult to move a message when the listeners themselves begin to question the integrity of the medium.
And for those who have suggested that the hosts who voiced support for the president and the war today simply happen to really believe it, and the meeting yesterday was irrelevant.–my issue is not about the legitimacy of having a meeting with the president. I would be happy to do so, as long as I could tell you, verbatim, what was asked and how he answered. As long as it was on the record. The point is, when a meeting is arranged secretly (see Hennen’s blog post), you agree to it being off-the-record and to not quote the president or give other details, there is at least the appearance of being manipulated. Even if you’re not.
It’s even been suggested by several e-mailers that it’s just fine for the president to use talk show hosts to convey an “Everything’s fine here, just trust me” message to the American people. I have an idea: If everything is fine, then absolutely have a clusterbuck with radio talk show hosts, let’s say Newsmax’s Top 25 Most Influential Talk Radio Hosts, which would include people like me and others who would ask hard questions, and aren’t worried about being invited back.
But that isn’t the president’s point. Instead, it’s marshaling the troops in an attempt to stop the freefall of his approval ratings, and to gain more time, I suppose, to win the nonexistent hearts and minds of terrorists everywhere.
wud certainly make...
{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
You have a standing invitation to my house, but I think you’d be better off if I get takeout for dinner. Not Chinese! Outback?
Tammy,
While I would love to have dinner with you on any night of the week, I think your statement that the hosts will relay the President’s message is uncalled for, rude and untrue. You have sat in for Laura Ingraham on a couple of occasions, and this is what you think of her? That she’s a mouthpiece for the President? I think you owe her and others an apology for that comment, if you have listened to Laura, Hugh and Mark Levin, you know that they speak what they think. If they happen to agree with the President, you can’t call that relaying the message. As for the others, I can’t comment on them because I don’t listen to them. If the President invited you to the White House, are you telling me that you wouldn’t go…even if to only voice your obvious displeasure in regards to his Presidency? Be honest…you would.
Dinner? You bet! That’d be like hitting a jackpot in Las Vegas or something.
I’ve heard some of those talk show hosts this morning give their maudlin accounts of the white house visit. They walked in as hosts but they left as shills. I don’t like the “I can’t tell you why your house is burning down because it’s a secret” crap. No one asked the president how he can justify any war to preserve america when he won’t protect the borders. And, don’t forget that this great love he has for our troops is a result of his many years of service in the National Guard. Secure the borders, enforce the laws and then I’ll listen.
I’ll tell you why Tammy wasn’t invited. It’s because she would have asked the same questions I have asked. Tammy, wear your non-invitation as a badge of honor.
The president has sworn to protect this country from all threats. He’s not doing it. Obeying 50% of the laws and upholding 50% or your oath is not acceptable. And just to be as redundant as I am pig-headed—Secure the borders and enforce the law! Do it now before we have a little hitler rise up and take control of a government that won’t protect its citizens.
Im not a very good cook but if your ever in Indiana we could watch a Notre Dame football game. I’m sure a USC girl like yourself would enjoy it : )
Laura Ingraham , Tammy Bruce… I love you both equally and I don’t think you owe anybody an apology.
Kevin, this may sound strange to you, but if I were invited to the White House for an “off the record” conversation I would indeed refuse. If I did go, it would mean I would be agreeing to have a conversation with the president and not be able to tell you what I said or what he said back to me. That’s unacceptable, and at the very least gives the impression after the fact of being someone’s mouthpiece, oh like the Republicans or the White House specifically.
From what I’ve heard from my listeners and readers, most who went in there with that rule and have had their shows today did what they were summoned to do: they defended the president and his disastrous Iraq war strategy.
So, when Laura or Hugh or anyone else accepts that sort of an invitation, I don’t know what they’re thinking, but I would never, at this point in time, meet with the president with a rule that says I couldn’t tell you what transpired. That’s ridiculous. “Off the record.” Please.
Oh, and I have a tiny feeling that Hugh and Laura and Mark Levin (all of whom I like very much) are not going to lose any sleep because I’ve issued an opinion on this. I think they can all handle it.
Tammy, I understand where you’re coming from. I guess my first reaction would be to question whether I’d be able to trust the group to continue giving us their honest appraisals. I do have a couple of thoughts on what he may have told them and why, but I’m not going to put them in writing here.
I don’t listen to talk radio, so what I would suggest is that those of you who do and who are familiar with the common threads followed by each of those personalities listen for changes, especially rants that may be usual fare, but are suddenly missing. Listen to the caller questions to see if there is any seemingly new direction that each host subtly pushes the caller into. That would give you a clue as to what’s going on.
It may not be all that big a deal. Astute listeners will pick up on it if there is a shift.
Thank you Tammy! I for one am very tired of conservative shills for this administration! We watch as they bumble from one crisis to another and these people that have priority access to the President keep defending him. We all know why and it is nice to know there some conservative personalities out there that will remain independent. It makes your message much more authentic and we truly appreciate your integrity!
I’m a little confused. Are you saying that if the president had a press conference just with talk show hosts, you would not attend it? Or are you saying you don’t like the fact that you were not invited and others were?
[Jamison, a "press conference" is an event where the press are told things that they then report to the public. An "off the record meeting" is something else entirely. The situation here is pretty clear. Tammy doesn't mince words. Figure it out.--ed.]
My most heartfelt regards to you, Tammy. This is my first time on your site and I find you quite refreshing. Having recently opted out of the republican party, I find any journalist or pundit who would do an “off the record” interview to be as untrustworthy as one who misinforms or disinforms for the sake of furthering an agenda, whether right or left. Like most people, my views are not all part of the left or right.
I will though be interested in viewing your site from here on out.
Thanks and please continue to keep both sides feet to the proverbial fire.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
paratisi
Well, just from the standpoint of history, it wasn’t to long ago that the press had to have the President’s permission before writing anything, or at least quoting him after a press conference. Course that’s old history…..carry on…
This development is very interesting, let’s see if these talk show host all of a sudden change their mind on the issues. Hmmmmmmmmm…….
The kleenex is out today to wipe the brown noses. Tammy, as a conservative Republican who has grown weary of Bush’s ineptitude, I am disgusted at talk show hosts who adopt a slavish posture after recently pretending to stand up to the President on immigration. Unlike other radio hosts I find Tammy, like a diamond, is forever. Randy.
The “off the record” meeting ends up being a disservice. Invite radio TALKshow hosts to meet with the President, and then don’t allow them to TALK about it. Why bother?? Who does it benefit?
If those invited think the President is going to be changed in some way by anything THEY have to say, all will be sadly mistaken. What do they think he values more: their (and their listeners) honest opinions, OR what they can do for him? Let’s face it. He made it very clear how much he values OUR opinions and desires during the Amnesty Bill debacle. I would think the honored guests should be insulted knowing they have only been summoned in hopes that they will end up “carrying water”.
Kudos to you, Tammy, for the stand that you take.
I think Tammy and the Savage are the only two who have the integrity to not sit down and play I’ve got a secret with a president who is willing to give America away on a silver platter.
Bruce/Savage 08 !!!!!
Oh and Tammy dinner at my house anytime. Hell, I would even cook those damn chicken livers that you like. Teri
Of course it’s a bad business for radio talk show hosts to have these little confabs with the president. It completely undermines their credibility. I can just see the Fairness Doctrine crowd licking their chops. Visits are one thing, but this “off the record” stuff is very unseemly.
Now, let me ask this. Am I the only one who finds this from Scott Hennen’s serenade extremely frightening?
He shared a story of one of the first decisions he was asked to make in the Oval Office. What style of rug would he want? He chuckled and explained to the questioner about to ask Laura…as he didn’t do rugs. He used that as a metaphor to explain how he manages the awesome responsibility he has. His role is to focus on the big decisions utilizing his core convictions that the United States is a force for good in the World. That we must lead and take on evil where wherever it is, so as to assure as many people as possible will enjoy the God given inalienable right to freedom. He spoke very eloquently about Good vs. Evil and even brought the story back to the rug, which was designed with only this Presidential input….to let it reflect light so as to influence his decision making. Light as in good vs. darkness as in evil.
I hear the martinis in the White House bar are lousy anyway.
Another troubling aspect to the whole Parrot-Fest is Scott Hennen’s description of this president being much different in person with the talk radio hosts than in public. When Hennen wishes for us to be able to see and experience the president ‘live’, I get the picture of just how far removed this guy I voted for twice really is from us. He has no will to come to us the way Reagan did – he feeds his parrots instead. How insulting.
I guess Bush is now using those hosts in attendance as his source for channeling his non-direct quotes to us little people. You know – we little people who get in the way of his self-serving Amnesty Bill and have REAL questions about his leadership – and competence at this point.
After Laura Ingraham’s “secret” meeting with Bush I noticed on yesterdays show a definite shift in attitude. She has always been far to apologetic for my taste, she apologizes to almost everybody for almost everything. Sections of her show were just stupid. It will be interesting to see if she continues to loose credability.
I don’t hold anything against those that attended, though I agree that appearance is important and that it is best to attend meetings that can be talked about. I do think that this shows the President’s tone-deafness to not damaging your supporters, eg, he is damaging conservative talk radio hosts because only conservative talk radio hosts were invited. So, if off the record meetings are appropriate, do not keep to just conservative talk radio hosts, also invite the LA Times journalist, Air America host, AP beat writer, NYT, etc. They can all operate off the record. Or if they don’t, then not only would there be reason to cut them out in the future, but the public would make up its mind on trusting that person.
Yeah, I’d invite you.
I know that I am a little late to this game. However, that may be a positive. I have had a chance to listen to a couple of the hosts that went to the White House. It is my opinion that those hosts can no longer be trusted. The ones I’ve listened to have changed. Laura I. had Tony Snow on her show today and gave him a pass. She let his lies on border security go unchallenged.
Thank God you were not invited, Tammy! Perhaps you’d be a pod person now too.
Keep up the good work, Tammy. We need you now more than ever!
You must log in to post a comment.