"Your desk is so clean Mr. President."

It is? Tell me more!!!!

Elizabeth Vargas is no Brit Hume or Bill O'Reilly, but she gave the President the best fluff interview she could. All the questions I had about the magnolia in the Rose Garden have now been answered. They did get down to some business, though (hey, it is a "news" show after all!). Here are some highlights of that...

#1-

VARGAS: So you don't agree with that report that calls the U.S. "woefully unprepared?"

BUSH: I think the U.S. is better prepared than woefully unprepared. There's no question we've got more work to do, and our report on Katrina outlined the work that needs to be done.

I thought, for example, the reaction to the 9/11 attack was a remarkable reaction, positively. When the terrorists attacked and destroyed two buildings, there were rescue teams rushing in to save lives. There was a response by the city that was a coordinated response. Katrina was one that we could have done a much better job [on], and we're learning the lessons from Katrina.

The President likely used 9/11 out of habit, but I don't see how it helps him. The President had nothing to do what was going on in NYC that morning. While he was reading 'My Pet Goat' and virtually absent all day (as he stayed hidden on Air Force One), that "remarkable reaction" he mentioned was being done by New York itself. The coordinated response was city-run. Rudy Guiliani, the NYPD, FDNY, and others became the leaders for the nation to look to that day until later that night when the President realized that maybe he should return to Washington. That one doesn't get to go on President Bush's resume. Katrina does. If city officials were able to organize a coordinate response on 9/11, that only makes it worse that Bush's federal government couldn't organize one for New Orleans when they had advance warning.

#2-

VARGAS: When you look back on those days immediately following when Katrina struck, what moment do you think was the moment that you realized that the government was failing, especially the people of New Orleans?

BUSH: When I saw TV reporters interviewing people who were screaming for help. It looked — the scenes looked chaotic and desperate. And I realized that our government was — could have done a better job of comforting people.

Two interesting things here- First, the President admitting that (as he was on vacation eating cake with Sen. McCain and later strumming a guitar in San Diego), he learned of the severity of the situation via television (or was it that DVD that Dan Bartlett made him?). Apparently Anderson Cooper has better information than Homeland Security.

Secondly, the President sees his initial failing as not failed to save people, but to comfort them. The President is so detached from what real leadership is, and so used to his photo-op presidency, that he just wished he could've soothed the chaos away with his concern. Maybe that's why his approval ratings have hit bottom; his presidency is not very comforting.

VARGAS: Let's move to Iraq. This has been a rough few days in Iraq since the bombing of the mosque in Samarra. ... What is the policy if, in fact, a civil war should break out or the sectarian violence continues? Are you willing to sacrifice American lives to get the Sunnis and the Shiites to stop killing each other?

BUSH: I don't buy your premise that there's going to be a civil war.

I singled this section out because I believe it's emblematic of the cluelessness with which the President operates. He lives in a bubble and chooses to reject any reality outside it he finds upsetting. The President makes a few concessions about "sectarian strife", but refuses to acknowledge how serious the situation has become. He refuses to buy the idea of civil war as a "premise" he can just "reject", as if Vargas is discussing a bad sci-fi movie. President Buchanan rejected the premise of a civil war here... how'd history judge him? It should also be noted that, before the war began, many people inside the government (and outside) rejected the White House's premises that: Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda, Iraq posed a threat to the United States, that we would be greeted as liberators, that the war would be financed by Iraqi oil and cost U.S. taxpayers next to nothing, that we wouldn't need more than 150,000 troops, etc. Who was right on all on that? Not Bush.

Things in Iraq will never improve on our end unless the President admits mistakes and adopts a new policy/approach.

VARGAS: So let me make sure I understand you. No matter what happens with the level of sectarian violence, the U.S. troops will stay there?

BUSH: The U.S. troops will stay there so long as — until the Iraqis can defend themselves. I mean, my policy has not changed. To summarize it, as the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down.

See? NO CHANGE AT ALL. A smart leader changes his plans to adapt to new circumstances. But not Georgie The War President. He knows what he's doing. After all, nothing's gone wrong with the plan so far, right?

The President also refuses to acknowledge that the situation with Iraqi security forces is not improving; in fact, it's actually getting worse. What if the Iraqis can never defend themselves? Do we stay forever? The President's withdrawal strategy doesn't mesh with reality... or with what the troops are saying.

VARGAS: But you haven't prejudged the 45-day security review. If in fact, there are still concerns, even if you don't share them —



BUSH: Well, there's a difference — well, there's a difference between somebody who has made up their mind regardless of the facts, and the facts, and so I want to hear what — again, I want to see the same facts presented to the Congress, and — but the 45-day period is a, is a good opportunity for people to find out the facts.

Do I even need to touch this one?