About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

NBC's Mitchell: Bush's reversals are "pragmatic" -- but Kerry's changes were "flip-flops"

December 05, 2006 5:00 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

SUMMARY: NBC's Andrea Mitchell asserted that President Bush "has proved he can be pragmatic," citing instances in which Bush has reversed course on major policy and staff decisions. But during the 2004 presidential campaign, Mitchell uncritically repeated GOP characterizations of purported shifts by Sen. John Kerry as "flip-flops."

21 Comments

In a report for the December 4 broadcast of NBC's Nightly News, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell asserted that President Bush "has proved he can be pragmatic," citing as support for that assertion instances in which Bush has reversed course on major policy and staff decisions: "He embraced the 9-11 Commission after opposing it, let Harriet Miers withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court, accepted former chief of staff Andy Card's resignation, and let [former Defense Secretary] Donald Rumsfeld go, only days after saying his defense chief would stay." But Mitchell uncritically repeated GOP characterizations of purported shifts by 2004 Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) as "flip-flops."

For example, on the October 25, 2004, and November 3, 2004, editions of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, Mitchell uncritically referred to Republican efforts to attack Kerry as a "flip-flopper," without stating specifically the purported basis for that characterization of Kerry.

Similarly, on the July 10, 2003, edition of Nightly News, Mitchell also uncritically referred to a Republican attack on Kerry for purportedly committing "a series of flip-flops on the Iraq issue." Kerry, running for the Democratic presidential nomination, stated that day, "It is time for the president to tell the truth, that we lack sufficient forces to do the job of reconstruction in Iraq and withdraw in a reasonable period." Mitchell noted that Kerry "voted for the war resolution last fall, but says the administration is failing to win the peace," and then reported that the Republican National Committee "quickly accused Kerry of a series of flip-flops on the Iraq issue." Again, Mitchell did not identify any examples of the purported "series of flip-flops" the RNC claimed Kerry made on the war.

Mitchell's description of Bush as "pragmatic" echoed her report on the November 9 edition of Nightly News, during which she stated that "[w]hen George Bush showed [former Defense Secretary] Donald Rumsfeld the door, he was signaling a new direction in Iraq, more pragmatic, less ideological."

In contrast with Mitchell's assessment, however, a December 3 Associated Press report by staff writer Jennifer Loven stated that Bush "often strenuously resists outside recommendations for action, then pivots to embrace them as his own when pressure becomes irresistible":

Bush's traditional pattern is also at work as he considers how to handle the 100 pages of advice -- all nonbinding -- he is about to receive.

He often strenuously resists outside recommendations for action, then pivots to embrace them as his own when pressure becomes irresistible.

The president opposed creation of the Sept. 11 commission in the first place, as well as the establishment of a catchall Homeland Security Department. Bush later changed his mind on both points, and ran campaigns on putting in place that commission's recommendations, and against Democrats who balked at the way he wanted to structure the Homeland Security behemoth.

From the December 4 broadcast of NBC's Nightly News:

MITCHELL: In the past, the president has been described as unwilling to shift gears.

MICHAEL BESCHLOSS (presidential historian): Psychologically, it's hard to imagine George W. Bush saying, "Gee, you know, I didn't plan to do any of these things that you recommend in this report, but I now see the light. I'm going to change everything."

MITCHELL: But his national security adviser sounded a lot more flexible yesterday with Tim Russert.

STEPHEN HADLEY (national security adviser): The president said we need to make changes. Some of those changes are going to be significant changes.

MITCHELL: And the president has proved he can be pragmatic. He embraced the 9-11 Commission after opposing it, let Harriet Miers withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court, accepted former chief of staff Andy Card's resignation, and let Donald Rumsfeld go, only days after saying his defense chief would stay. Howard Baker helped Ronald Reagan find a graceful exit from the Iran-Contra mess, rescuing Reagan's last two years in office.

From the November 9 broadcast of NBC's Nightly News:

MITCHELL: When George Bush showed Donald Rumsfeld the door, he was signaling a new direction in Iraq, more pragmatic, less ideological, and turning to his father's advisers to find the exit strategy. Former Bush CIA director Bob Gates at the Pentagon, former secretary of state James Baker, to draw the road map. What are their options to prevent an all-out civil war? Defense experts say none are good.

From the November 3, 2004, edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MITCHELL: You know, I think [political analyst] Charlie [Cook] is really on to something, especially when you talk about the cultural issues. And the bottom line is that -- at least, if you believe the exit polling -- moral values as defined by the Republican campaign, is the equivalent of economic issues in terms of what people cared about. Any time you have got a campaign where people care as much about moral values than about the economy, especially at a time when, you know, the economy has not been perceived by many people as doing that well, this is pretty extraordinary.

JOE SCARBOROUGH (MSNBC host): It's one of the most remarkable numbers at 21 percent in the exit polling of NBC, select moral values as the No. 1 issue --

MITCHELL: And let me just complete the thought, Joe.

SCARBOROUGH: -- and economics, 20 percent; and terrorism, below that.

MITCHELL: And let me just complete the thought because the way the Swift Boat Veterans [for Truth] and the other groups define John Kerry early in the campaign, is to make him seem as though he were as not in sync with moral values, because he was, you know, a flip-flopper or whatever. By having defined him that way they really put him in a box. And it was very hard for him to get out of that box.

From the October 25, 2004, edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

FINEMAN: The Republicans have been trying to attack Kerry, make Kerry the issue, Kerry's weakness, et cetera.

MATTHEWS: I see.

MITCHELL: With the flip-flop --

FINEMAN: With the flip-flops, everything else.

From the July 10, 2003, edition of NBC's Nightly News:

MITCHELL: As questions about Iraq trail the president to Africa, Democratic presidential candidates see a possible opening. Today John Kerry jumped in, saying the war is continuing and are the casualties.

KERRY: It is time for the president to tell the truth, that we lack sufficient forces to do the job of reconstruction in Iraq and withdraw in a reasonable period.

MITCHELL: Senator Kerry voted for the war resolution last fall, but says the administration is failing to win the peace. The Republican National Committee quickly accused Kerry of a series of flip-flops on the Iraq issue. Still, 10 weeks after the president declared an end to major combat operations, the public is getting restless. A new Pew poll says only 23 percent of those questioned now believe the military effort is going very well, a big drop from the 61 percent who thought so in mid-April, when U.S. troops took Baghdad. Today, the president called for patience.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mr. l (December 05, 2006 5:06 pm ET)
         

      Mitchell's use of 'pragmatic' is going to be the 'new' talking point for republicans...along with 'it's time to be responsible and realize the SITUATION has changed..."

      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (December 05, 2006 5:22 pm ET)
           

        will be, "Never mind how we got there; that's ancient history...we must look ahead toward a solution."

        Then, when Hillary announces for President, they'll bloviate 24/7 about Whitewater, "Travelgate" and Vince Foster. Hide and watch.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by iflurry8094 (December 05, 2006 5:18 pm ET)
         

      does "pragmatic" even mean in this context? Mitchell might as well be saying Bush shows he can be "strong" or "willing" or "smart" when making these reversals.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (December 05, 2006 5:27 pm ET)
         

      Is that Bush is not now, nor has he ever been, "The Decider". The man is a puppet, an empty suit, a mouthpiece without substance. He is an idiot elevated to the pennacle of power by a cabal of heartless misanthropic sociopathic money-grubbing billionaires.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by rms (December 05, 2006 5:39 pm ET)
         

      Let's recap...

      •During 2000 campaign, Bush was FOR the “restriction” on carbon dioxide emissions. After elected, changed mind. •During 2000 campaign, same sex marriage was a state issue. Later, it became worthy of a constitutional amendment. •During 2000 campaign, opposed Yucca Mountain site as repository for nuclear waste unless supported by science. After elected, and getting Nevada’s electoral votes, Yucca Mountains became the choice despite no scientific support. •During 2000 campaign, supported a continued ban on assault weapons. 2004, changed his mind. •At first the US needed tax cuts because we were taking too much of the taxpayers money and we had a surplus. Then we needed a tax cut to stimulate the economy… Whatever the conditions, we needed a tax cut. •Trade tariffs… Particularly steel and timber. Sometimes for, sometimes against. •In 1978, when running for Congress, for abortion rights. Now, anti-abortion. •After 9/11, get Osama bin Laden “dead or alive.” Later, no big a deal whether we get him or not. •Originally against a Department of Homeland Security. Changed his mind. •Originally against a 9-11 commission. Changed his mind. •In 2000 supported private groups putting money into campaigns "[T]hat's what freedom of speech is all about. ... People have the right to run ads. They have the right to do what they want to do, under the -- under the First Amendment in America."] By 2004, when "his" 527s were getting outspent by opposing 527s, they were a bad idea. •Before the Iraq war the reasons for going to war were the imminent threat from the existence of weapons of mass destruction and biological weapons. After they were not found, the reason for the war was the evilness of Saddam Hussein.

      All pragmatic changes, for sure...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jscott (December 05, 2006 6:26 pm ET)
           

        I thought she said "pigheaded".

        Report Abuse
      • Author by political_left-religious_right (December 06, 2006 9:38 am ET)
           

        Actually, it was George H. W. Bush who ran for congress as pro-choice and for president as pro-life. The reason for this change was not any great personal conviction, but because he was Reagan's running mate in 1980 and had to tow the line with Ronnie.

        I'm reminded of an exchange from the brilliant British comedy "Yes, Minister":

        Appleby: "Ministers have a whole host of desireable qualities."

        Hacker (a minister): "Such as?"

        Appleby: "Well... uh... they have a certain, uh, intellectual suppleness, and uh, moral maneuverability."

        Hacker: "What does that mean?"

        Appleby: "You can't trust them."

        Report Abuse
    • Author by holly (December 05, 2006 5:54 pm ET)
         

      Smart, supple, and open people change their minds.

      Dull, rigid, and closed people don't.

      Flip-flopping is presented as a pejorative, but it can be the symptom of bright mind and a brave soul.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (December 05, 2006 6:09 pm ET)
           

        We ARE talking about bush, remember? ;)

        Report Abuse
        • Author by holly (December 05, 2006 6:27 pm ET)
             

          ...you want Bush to change his mind on many issues? I do. And I want other neocons to repent. I want W to stop borrowing so much money. I want Americans to pay for their services, rather than have our grandchildren pay. In this way, I'm a conservative. And I want Bush to be a conservative too. Every year they devalue the dollar by printing more money to manage the national debt. When countries trade dollars for euros, we'll be living very different lives. So, rather than have W continue to be fiscally and internationally reckless just so I can say to neocons, "Shame on you for voting for him," I want W to repent. I don't want to live through hard times. And just as much, I don't want our children and grandchildren to suffer for our lack of discipline.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (December 05, 2006 6:36 pm ET)
               

            bad dog, no bone for me!

            But yes, I want those things too. It was totally inappropriate for Bush to win by a squeaker and then expect he had a mandate to promote the will of a minority of the population at the expense of the majority. But part of me does want to see the next Dem president engage in payback. Guess that means no bone tomorrow, either. Dang!

            Report Abuse
    • Author by holly (December 05, 2006 7:24 pm ET)
         

      But no payback, please.

      You know that expression about an eye for an eye and everybody's blind?

      Well, with political payback, we'll soon look like the Protestants and the Catholics in Northern Ireland.

      Those Irish will gaze westward and wonder, "What's wrong with those Americans? Why can't they get along?"

      Report Abuse
      • Author by olivelawyers (December 06, 2006 10:44 am ET)
           

        by our baser instincts, there you surface. Doubtlessly, there is a special place for you.

        Blessed be the peacemaker.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Watcher_IL (December 05, 2006 7:27 pm ET)
         

      Don't forget my favorite from the '04 campaign. Supported a ban on gay marriage, while Kerry supported civil unions. Two weeks before election day, favored civil unions. =)

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (December 06, 2006 1:18 am ET)
           

        and he can decide to change his mind when it's politically useful.

        As long as he doesn't flip flop, like that hippy wind surfing Kerry.

        Who changed his mind according to changing facts and circumstances. That's just flaky.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (December 06, 2006 9:06 am ET)
         

      was to be displayed here but being a decider, I am flip-flopping in a pragmatic sense only and just not doing it. Maybe some other time, I think. Possibly. I just don't know.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete bogs (December 06, 2006 9:07 am ET)
         

      when liberals and Democrats said some of the same things Rummy said about Iraq in his recent memo, they got the "cut and run" label... now they're framing it like these were the president's ideas, and they're suddenly good ones...

      it's just like when a big deal was made of Clinton's lack of military service in Vietnam, but all the sudden when a vet is running (Kerry) against someone who was able to skip the war (as did his VP and many of his staffers and supporters), what people during that time isn't so important anymore...

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Sagra (December 06, 2006 10:40 am ET)
         

      >> MITCHELL: When George Bush showed Donald Rumsfeld the door, he was signaling a new direction in Iraq, more pragmatic, less ideological ....

      Rumsfeld was out a few days after he wrote a memo to Bush stating that "Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough."

      Here's the text of the memo: [link to blog.alexwhalen.com]

      The words "draw down" and "withdrawal" appear quite frequently. So, by Mitchell's logic, if, after you write a letter to your boss proposing Plan B, your boss immediately fires you and makes a public statement supporting Plan A, then it means he's ready to implement Plan B.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by feckless (December 06, 2006 5:51 pm ET)
         

      Kerry voted for an appropriation of funds, with accounting procedures. He voted against a later version where the GOP had taken out all oversight. Now, $9 Billion dollars of MY TAX MONEY is missing in Iraq. But that assclown Norm Coleman keeps harping on the Iraqi money missing from the very effective oil for food program. Who's fault is this? Kerry's because he could have given the above answer the first time, and taken it to the GOP for being thieves in the temple, but he didn't, and now were 2 years deeper into the muck. I'm glad W has changed some of his positions, but true responsibility involves admitting your mistakes and Apologizing to those you wronged, apparently Bush's version of redemption ended with step 12 of his quitting booze.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.