MSNBC's O'Donnell claimed Bush is seen as authentic; polls say otherwise
On the November 27 broadcast of NBC's syndicated The Chris Matthews Show, MSNBC chief White House correspondent Norah O'Donnell claimed that President Bush -- despite decreased public support for his policies, including the Iraq war -- has retained his "authenticity" with the public. O'Donnell provided no support for her assertion. In fact, recent polling by major media outlets, such as ABC News/Washington Post and Associated Press-Ipsos, shows that a majority of Americans thinks Bush is not honest. A November 8-13 Harris Poll indicated that, by a margin of 64 percent to 32 percent, Americans think the Bush administration "mislead[s] the public on current issues to achieve their own end."
During a discussion about potential 2008 presidential candidates, O'Donnell said, "I think one of the most important things ... is authenticity." She then attributed the unsuccessful 2004 presidential campaign of Sen. John F. Kerry (D-MA) to a lack of it. O'Donnell continued, "And as much as people may disagree with President Bush about the war, many other things, what he does have, to some degree, is authenticity."
But the most recent polling available on the question of authenticity suggests otherwise. A November 2 ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 58 percent of adults reported that the phrases "He is honest and trustworthy" and "He shares your values" do not apply to Bush. And an Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted November 7-9 found that, while 82 percent of adults said the word "stubborn" applied to Bush, only 42 percent said "honest" did. That same poll found that 57 percent do not regard him as honest.
As Media Matters for America previously noted, O'Donnell made a similar claim on a September 4 broadcast of The Chris Matthews Show: In the midst of criticism over the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina, she observed that Bush "thrives on being a crisis manager."
From the November 27 broadcast of NBC's The Chris Matthews Show:
O'DONNELL: I think one of the most important things, if the election were held today, is authenticity. And that was Kerry's problem -- was authenticity. And as much as people may disagree with President Bush about the war, many other things, he does have, to some degree, authenticity. And that's why, on the Republican side, Senator [John] McCain [R-AZ] looks like a hot guy. Authenticity matters. And that's a big problem, I think, for Senator [Hillary Rodham] Clinton [D-NY] too, if you talk about -- people don't know if she's the old Hillary or the new Hillary.
But isn't her hair just swell?
About 10 years down the road we may learn about whose payroll SHE is on
She was trying to help your side out.
Media Matters trys to claim polls show otherwise but they fall flat on their face. O'Donnell was talking about his personality and core beliefs as authenticity. It has nothing to do with trust.
People believe Bush is stubborn. They expect Bush to be stubborn. If you has someone if Bush is prowar or against the war, can you answer it?
If I ask if Kerry is pro-war or against the war, can you answer it?
If I ask if Hilary is pro-war or against the war, can you answer it?
With Bush no matter if you love him or hate you know where he stands. The other two it depends on what the polls say or what group they are trying to impress that day.
she says people may disagree with him on the war, but he's seen as authentic. if someone is trying to mislead others, and that's what americans think about bush, that's not authentic.
"you know where he stands" like when he opposed the dept of homeland security and then turned around. or opposing the 9-11 commission til the heat from the families got too intense.
mefirst:
Like a good "CONSERVATIVE", we all knew where Bush stood on such issues as deficit spending, the SIZE of government, nation building, protecting our borders, open and accountable government, and using the military as "peacekeepers".
Unfortunately, Bush's ACTIONS are the polar opposites of the stances he took on thise issues. In short, he has NO PRINCIPLES AT ALL, other than making money for his pals.
leatherhelmet says, "If you has (sic. ASK?) someone if Bush is prowar or against the war, can you answer it?"
RESPONSE: You mean, BEFORE this weekend, when anyone calling for a drawing down of our presence there was called a traitor, a comfort to the enemy, and an enemy of our troops?
Or do you mean, AFTER this weekend, where the White House is praising Senator Biden, and saying HIS plan for getting out of Iraq is NEARLY IDENTICAL to their own ... their plan which, darnit, they didn't introduce until AFTER the Democrats spelled out the particulars?
Because, NOW I'm not sure if Bush is FOR the war, of FOR the exit strategy. I'm guessing the White House has read the polls, and decided that their "ROCK SOLID PRINCIPLES" should give way to getting us the hell out of Bush's quagmire (and saying the PLAN was theirs FIRST! LOL).
I am glad Leatherhelmet always knows where the President stands on an issue. I have received mixed messages concerning, among other things:
*Restrictions on carbon monoxide pollution
*Whether same-sex marriage is a state (2000 campaign) issue or worthy of a constitutional amendment.
*Whether there should be a Deparment of Homeland Security.
*Whether there should be a 9-11 Commission.
*Whether he is for the assault weapon ban (2000 campaign) or willing to let that restriction go by the wayside (2004).
*Trade tariffs on Steel and Timber.
*Whether the Yucca Mountains should be a nuclear waste repository.
*Why we need a tax cut.
*For or against 527-type campaign donations (2000 for; 2004 against).
*Reasons for going to war with Iraq.
If I ask if Kerry is pro-war or against the war, can you answer it?
If I ask if Hilary is pro-war or against the war, can you answer it?
With Bush no matter if you love him or hate you know where he stands.
Bull. Bush is the WORST flip-flopper in history. One day bin Ladin was public enemy #1, the next it was Saddam. One day Saddam has sufficient WMDS to kill us all, so it's off to war, off to war, to save us from the tyrant whore! then the next it's oops! we made a SLIGHT miscalculation, so the Iraq War is really about freeing Iraqis and democratizing the Middle East. Then we found the WMDs then we didn't. Saddam and Al Qaeda are in cahoots then, nope, sorry, we missed than one too. We can’t lump together bin Ladin and Saddam then poof! there’s no discriminating one from the other.
Which is it, Mr. Bush? Pick a story, any story.
As for Kerry and Hilary and the rest of the Dems, THEY have been amply clear:
THEY wanted bin Ladin brought to justice. Bush changed his position on this. THEY didn’t.
THEY wanted a plan for the Iraq War, more troops, follow the Future of Iraq Project. Bush not only didn’t care about a plan but Donald Rumsfeld told the military to IGNORE the FoIP, which turned out to be a huge mistake.
THEY WANT AN EXIT STRATEGY. THEY have reiterated this point over and over and still it falls on not deaf ears but self-superior ones.
Sorry, leather, but your straw man generalities don’t hold up under even the slightest zephyr of reality.
leatherhelmet - Monday November 28, 2005 03:15:29 PM EST
So you have decided she was talking about personality, and you know this how? Have you been using your amazing mind reading powers again? Here is the question asked by the poll
Do you think that the Bush Administration generally provides accurate information regarding current issues or do you think they generally mislead the public on current issues to achieve their own end?"<<
On WHAT PLANET can you claim that 64% of the people think Bush does not provide accurate information and that he generally misleads the public but they still think that he is AUTHENTIC????
We know know. Her husband's.
I don't see the problem with that one. It's not offensive or anything. It's just an opinion. An opinion that was echoed in entire Time article I remember reading at the gym.
I'm not questionning whether she's right or not, I just don't think this is worth being mentionned here.
It would be nice if the opinion she offered was based on some facts.
Also what does she mean by old Hillary vs. new Hillary? Yet another media-perpetuated myth...
O'DONNELL: I think one of the most important things, if the election were held today, is authenticity. And that was Kerry's problem -- was authenticity. And as much as people may disagree with President Bush about the war, many other things, he does have, to some degree, authenticity.
...are these people in the News/Telejournalism business, or are they in the Public Relations business? I mean, isn't this something that you'd expect to hear from a Publicist, or a campaign spokesperson?
It's strangely coincidental, that at a time when polls are indicating that an overwhelming majority of the public do not trust the President's motives, or even his words, in the runup and conduct of the war in Iraq, we have MSNBC pitching his authenticity.
Is MSNBC in the News/Telejournalism business, or are they in the public relations business?
Is MSNBC the public relations arm of defense contractor General Elecrtic, or not?
I think she meant authentic in the sense of: "true to one's own personality, spirit, or character".
wens
I agree with your definition choice. Maybe a better word would be "sincere."
I have to admit, I really can't tell if he is lying when he says ridiculous stuff that everyone knows is false, or if he sincerely believes all the nonsense he spouts.
"I think she meant authentic in the sense of: "true to one's own personality, spirit, or character"."
Doesn't that boil down to "honesty"? And if not, people don't think that he's honest but it's more important to them that he's true to his own personality? "He's a liar...but he's being true to his own personality, and that makes it alright."
But that's not the definition of authentic or authenticity.
O'Donnell either used the wrong word to describe George Bush or she is incorrect in her description of Bush. He is not trustworthy. He has held a consistent, yet wrong belief.
Actually, it is one of 5 definitions for authentic.
[link to www.m-w.com]
5 : true to one's own personality, spirit, or character
OK, that fits. he started out an incompetent liar, and he's still one. he's authentic !
incompetent and a liar, i mean.
If AUTHENTIC means "true to one's own personality, spirit, or character", then there are a great many AUTHENTIC people in history.
AUTHENTIC people include Adolph Hitler, Stalin, Tim McVeigh, Machine Gun Kelly, Jeffrey Dahrmer, and a host of other "authentic MONSTERS".
Defining a term so craftily does not impart any shred of ADMIRABLE quality to the use of "authentic".
AUTHENTIC people crowd our prisons today, true to their natures all. Bush belongs among their number.
Right, I guess in order to decide whether MSNBC's O'Donnell's use of the word authenticity to characterize the President is either a strangely coincidental pitching of the President's "credibility", at a time when polls show a majority of Americans doubting it, or is simply an observation that he's "true to himself" (whatever the heck that's supposed to mean), would depend upon the definition of authenticity: [link to www.m-w.com]
authenticity, the noun form of the adjective authentic, meaning
2a: worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact (paints an authentic picture of our society)
3: not false or imitation : REAL, ACTUAL (based on authentic documents)
5: true to one's own personality, spirit, or character
...so MSNBC's O'Donnell may have meant the President has authenticity in any of several senses of that word; but it's my guess that the third highest sense of the word was what was intended...
3: not false or imitation : REAL, ACTUAL (based on authentic documents)
...or else why the strange coincidence of characterizing him that way, at a time when polls show most Americans doubting his authenticity, in that sense of the word? (in addition to doubting the authenticity of certain falsified documents, in that sense of the word)
...unless someone, in defense of MSNBC, O'Donnell, or the President, wants to claim that the opinion polls of late show a majority of Americans doubting the President is "true to his own personality" (whatever that means), as opposed to a majority of American's doubting the President's "credibility" (which is what those polls show).
...anyone who makes that claim strains their own "credibility", their own authenticity.
When I look up the definition of 'authenticity', I find the following-undisputed credibility!
O'Donnell is saying that Bush has 'undisputed credibility'?
I dispute that. It's not credible.
George Bush does have a pattern of consistency. That is not the same as authenticity.
I think that O'Donnell just used the wrong word. Authentic does not mean consistency, or an even more descriptive phrase, stuck in the mud, unwilling to change even when confronted with clear evidence that the previous held beliefs are dangerous or useless.
she said previously, according to this, bush thrives on being a crisis manager. i think the correct term would be crisis maker. she also praises john mccain who is taking a nice little turn to the right to prep for 08. maybe she meant bush is authentically dishonest.
mefirst:
As to CRISIS manager/causer, there are many stories of "angels of mercy", NURSES who were found to have been making their patients sick, just so they could be the CURING HAND in their "miraculous" recovery.
Bush is of this brand of counterfeit person: He CREATES crises, in the hopes that HE will be the "savior". Only problem is, the problems he causes, he doesn't have the least clue how to solve. Plus, they are very bloody and costly for OTHER people (although, praise be, Bush's FRIENDS manage to make out financially).
So, YES, Bush prefers crisis, because he CREATES them. Whether he is a Crisis "SOLVER", we have the results in hand, and the verdict is: He can be depended upon to make everything he touches WORSE.
tex,
The problem with your ridiculous analysis of Bush, the crisis creator, is that you can't have it both ways.......if Bush is the brilliant, master cratfsman of crisis and the deft manipulator of facts and pre War intelligence to fool everyone and prop himself up as the great rescuer and crisis solver, then he can't be the out-of touch buffoon and the "dumb as stone" dufus you make him out to be.
You are confused and talking out of both sides of your mouth, again.
tommy:
You are confused. Let's use the Jerry Lewis model, to indicate how Bush fits in.
You say, "The problem with your ridiculous analysis of Bush, the crisis creator, is that you can't have it both ways..."
RESPONSE: Fair enough. What "BOTH WAYS" are there?
You say, "if Bush is the brilliant, master craftsman of crisis ..."
RESPONSE" It takes neither brilliance nor master craftsmanship to manufacture a crisis. All you need do is be reckless and inept, and it helps to have the desire to DO something, anything, to get attention, or to please your buddies.
You say, "... and the deft manipulator of facts and pre War intelligence to fool everyone ..."
RESPONSE: The NeoCons have a ton of "deft manipulators", and it doesn't really matter if Bush knows the truth and doesn't care, or if he's just the puppet who has to be fooled along with everyone else (plausible deniability?). Once again, it takes no brilliance nor master craftsmanship to be the NeoCon's figurehead. This one only calls for amorality and/or gullibility.
You continue, "... and prop himself up as the great rescuer and crisis solver."
RESPONSE: Once again, it's Bush's HANDLERS who position HIM as the "savior", the only one who can rescue America from disaster. When he wins, they get the power to do what THEY want. He may believe he's a savior himself, but the real heavy lifting of the PR is his handlers "managing" his image.
You finish, "... then he can't be the out-of touch buffoon and the "dumb as stone" dufus you make him out to be."
RESPONSE: There is no contradiction. I understand it would be a "have it BOTH ways" deal, if I believed Bush was managing everything about image and policy from the White House, instead of being the "spokesman" or "client" for the machinations of a great many powermongers, primarily Cheney.
Sorry. No contradiction. Bush can be the buffoon, dumb-as-a-stone spokesman for a nefarious and intricate machine of power grabbing, operated by a cabal of would-be aristocratic dictators. There is no contradiction here.
You don't have to know how to drive a car to cause havoc and disaster with one.
This is a carefully crafted image Bush's backers have given him. Notice how often you see him with his sleeves rolled up or in blue jeans. It turns out Bush is every bit a 'blue blood' as Kerry is. Bush is a child of privilege, though his handlers have worked diligently to tool this "authentic, man-of-the-people" image. The Christian Right especially believes it.
Bush loves to wear costumes. Sometimes it's military garb (just like Castro!), other times it's cowboy outfits. When he was going down to New Orleans, you'd always see him with rolled up sleeves because he was pretending that he was working construction and being all hands-on and such. He's like all the Village People rolled into one. Next, don't be surprised to see him in a headdress as a native American.
like castro. :-) good analogy.
Maybe Al Gore lent him Naomi Wolf and she's advising him on what costume to wear for each occasion. Seriously tho, isn't criticizing a man for what he wears a bit shallow for the high tone this site sets?
"Seriously tho, isn't criticizing a man for what he wears a bit shallow for the high tone this site sets?"
No, it depends on the underlying point. If it's "look at the phony image of him they are trying to plant in your mind...", it's perfectly legitimate. If it's "he's wearing white after Labor Day!" then that would be shallow.
I think what O'Donnell is trying to claim here is that the public thinks of Bush as "real" (what you see is what you get) as opposed to a Kerry who she seems to allude to as being perceived by the public as being rather a "phony"(putting on "airs"; pretending to relate to the common man). Of course both men are interchangeable when it comes to being wealthy and truly out of touch with the average American. Bush is also dangerously reckless and easily deluded, but that's a whole nother topic.
MSNBC's O'Donnell claimed Bush is seen as authentic; polls say otherwise....
One can only hope that Norah used the wrong word but there seems to be a pattern of her continuously reporting erroneous facts & figures.
I realize each network(today's upstarts offer this)should have a balanced format for the viewing public, but Norah should be working for the fake news with this kind of comment--FOX.
I can only hope someone like Mara Liasson & Juan Williams on FOX(who both actually work for NPR) can walk out of Fox & keep a clear view of the world/politics after an evening doing commentary with a completely worthless news organization...don't go there MSNBC. But then again, when you're dealing with Chris Matthews....I'm not sure why MSNBC wouldn't have their correspondants qualify their comments.
If Norah needs proof of just how unauthentic Duhhbya really is, she need look no farther than his on-again-off-again Texas drawl.
O'Donnell is just abiding by the golden rule "if you can't say anything nice, then follow the Bushie rule and twist the truth and repeat the distortion until you get indicted or somethin'..." Perhaps it helps to understand O'Donnell hails from a very staunch GOP, highly decorated (ret.) senior military officer household here in Tx.Of course, not all military folks follow such profiles - my father is also a highly decorated ret.(WWII combat)military officer, however he has always been a rabid yellowdawg (ultra left liberal) demo.That said, in local newspaper profiles of O'Donnell here in SanAntonio, her background is always celebrated, so it is fair game to be mentioned here. You can take the lil' ole hawk deb outta Tx...BUT...
Everytime this chick goes on TV to open her pie hole she blubs out that Bush is soooo strong. I wish she would report what the American people are saying right now, instead of trying to help Bush. Everytime ODonnell is on a talking head show she tries to out do her grandmother, Andrea Mitchell to love on Bush. As a matter of fact, most of the MSNBC talking heads have a GOP crush and say so every chance they get.....they are as right wing as FOX is.....
Bush, authentic? He is a stage prop.
May 2, 2002 - Bush suits up for a fighter jet ride and lands on the USS Abraham Lincoln with a huge Mission Accomplished banner.
Thanksgiving 2003 - While with the troops in Iraq, Bush poses for a picture holding a fake cooked turkey.
Sept 15, 2005 - Bush Speech from deserted Jackson Square in New Orleans (aftermath of Hurricane Rita). As soon as the speech is done, the generators and lighting are taken away and he leaves the city in the dark.
Oct 13, 2005 - Staged tele-conference with the Troops
Bush Administration uses fake news (government videos, pays commentator to tout No Child left Behind, gives Gannon regular access to White House news briefings for softball questions)
Bush Administration uses fake evidence to start a war.
Bush's fake countrywide "town meetings" with screened audiences.
correction to above (Hurricane Katrina, not Rita) as noted below:
Sept 15, 2005 - Bush Speech from deserted Jackson Square in New Orleans (aftermath of Hurricane Katrina). As soon as the speech is done, the generators and lighting are taken away and he leaves the city in the dark.
If you know who O'Donnell's hubby is you'll know why she's such a shameless shill.
--authentic may in fact be accurate...if you were to construct a model of a president who was totally cynical, simple minded, felt that only those with wealth had any value, was extremely brave with other people's blood, delusions of grandeur...i don't think he would have surprised you a single time. the only decision that gave him trouble was stem cells, and that was because it was a conflict between 2 pillars of his base (religious fanatics vs big bizness).