quote: Ari Fleischer was President Bush's first press secretary....But during his years of service, I admired him greatly for his absolute unflappability.
No matter how outrageous the questions, no matter how insistent and rude the questioner, he answered calmly and honestly.
If he couldn't answer because the information was not to be revealed -- like, for instance, military strategy and tactics -- he said quite candidly that he was not going to answer and why. He never pretended to answer.
Does anyone here agree with this? It's almost like Card has confused him for another press secretary altogether.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I thought Ari did a fine job with what he was allowed to do. At least he was entertaining...
You don't seriously think there will ever be a press secretary for this administration (or, possibly, any future administration) that will actually answer questions, do you?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
he went to my alma mater. Means nothing, aside from the fact I kept looking at him, sure he was at least fifteen years older than I am. It was one of those "oh crap I'm old" moments when I found out he is just a cuple of years older.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: You don't seriously think there will ever be a press secretary for this administration (or, possibly, any future administration) that will actually answer questions, do you?
posted
Unflappability is one of the minor virtues, like having good teeth. I'm not one to praise it. Scott Peterson was unflappable.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
But if part of your job is to answer questions in a calm, controlling way, and not to cave under pressure, then "unflappability is a good quality. Comparing that to a psycho murderer really makes no sense to me.
[ March 27, 2005, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: Elizabeth ]
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd say Peterson flapped quite badly when he died his hair and headed for Mexico. That was admitted against him, I believe.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't trust a lot of what Ari said, as a whole he seemed like he was always holding back, which I know you have to do at times as a press secretary. But he had that same sort of smug, "don't question me or the administration or you are a bad American" kind of attitude that automatically made me question everything he said.
I'm not sure Scott McClellan is any better, but to be honest I don't really pay attention to press conferences anymore, it's just the Bush Propaganda Mouthpiece session.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: But if part of your job is to answer questions in a calm, controlling way...
See, this is the problem I had with Fleischer, and the problem I had with OSC's laudatory description of him. Fleischer's job was indeed to answer questions. On the downside, while he managed to talk a lot in often very entertaining ways, I can't recall many questions he ever answered.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
That was not really my point, though. My point was directed at the idea of being "unflappable" compared to a murderer, when it is a skill which is used in many jobs.
And, how much freedom does this position really hold? I would wager very close to none. The president says how much truth can be revealed, the secretary reveals that much and no more. Any president. Any press secretary.
Can you really imagine one of them saying, "OK, guys, here's the real dirt..."
Therefore, to criticize Ari Fleischer for being good at following directions is unfair.
Instead, focus on his rather petulant, whiny tone or something.
Posts: 10890 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Specifically, I'm disagreeing with the following statement of OSC's:
quote: If he couldn't answer because the information was not to be revealed -- like, for instance, military strategy and tactics -- he said quite candidly that he was not going to answer and why. He never pretended to answer.
This directly conflicts with my own observations of the man and his methods.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The press secretary is not just a mouthpiece minion, they get considerable in on information and input on what needs to be released and how it is said. A white house press secretary is in charge of PR, not someone being ordered how to do PR, though they decide things in concert with other people working there.
Also, I would hope any press secretary ordered to do something wrong would at the very least refuse to do it, and hopefully quit.
Ari Fleischer was extremely effective at his job; whether that is an indictment or an endorsement depends on your viewpoint (and the facts that viewpoint rests upon).
In that narrow meaning of the word good, effective, he was good at his job. I like to think that good typically means something more than effective, though.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
