NY Times uncritically reported that Bush said he was "focused elsewhere, like on gasoline prices" after he admitted he "hadn't heard" that gas could rise to $4 per gallon
SUMMARY: In an article about President Bush's February 28 press conference, The New York Times uncritically quoted Bush saying the following in response to a question about the source of funding for his presidential library: "I, frankly, have been focused elsewhere, like on gasoline prices and, you know, my trip to Africa, and haven't seen the fund-raising strategy yet." The Times did not mention that earlier in the press conference, Bush said he "hadn't heard" that gas prices might rise to $4 gallon.
In a February 29 article on President Bush's press conference the previous day in which Bush was asked whether he expected to receive foreign donations for his presidential library, The New York Times uncritically reported that Bush's "detail was scant" regarding his plans for the library because, according to Bush, "I, frankly, have been focused elsewhere, like on gasoline prices, my trip to Africa, and haven't seen the fund-raising strategy yet." Nowhere in the article did it note that earlier in the press conference, before he was asked about his plans for the library, Bush admitted he "hadn't heard" that gas prices might rise to $4 per gallon. Asked by a reporter, "What's your advice to the average American who is hurting now, facing the prospect of $4 a gallon gasoline?" Bush said, "Wait, what did you just say? You're predicting $4 a gallon gasoline? ... That's interesting. I hadn't heard that," and added, "I know it's high now."
The February 29 New York Times article in its entirety:
President Bush said Thursday that he would probably accept foreign donations to build his presidential library in Dallas and would consider keeping the donors' names confidential if they do not want to be identified.
The comments, at a White House news conference, were the first time Mr. Bush had talked in any detail about his plans for the library, which will be at Southern Methodist University, the alma mater of First Lady Laura Bush. But his detail was scant.
"We just announced the deal," he said, "and I, frankly, have been focused elsewhere, like on gasoline prices and, you know, my trip to Africa, and haven't seen the fund-raising strategy yet."
Secrecy surrounding the financing of presidential libraries has become an issue in the campaign to succeed Mr. Bush, as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, has faced questions about who financed her husband's library in Little Rock, Ark. Former President Bill Clinton has accepted foreign donations and has declined to release a list.
Mr. Bush's library, which is to include a museum and a public policy institute, is expected to cost more than $200 million, though Mr. Bush said Thursday that he could not confirm that amount. He said he would "probably take some foreign money, but don't know yet."
From President Bush's February 28 press conference:
QUESTION: What's your advice to the average American who is hurting now, facing the prospect of $4 a gallon gasoline, a lot of people facing --
BUSH: Wait, what did you just say? You're predicting $4 a gallon gasoline?
QUESTION: A number of analysts are predicting --
BUSH: Oh, yeah?
QUESTION: -- $4 a gallon gasoline this spring when they reformulate.
BUSH: That's interesting. I hadn't heard that.
QUESTION: Yes, sir.
BUSH: Yes. I know it's high now.
[...]
QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Now that you've found a location for your presidential library, you've got to find the money to build it. Reports indicate that you may be trying to collect as much as $200 million. Is that figure accurate? Do you believe it's important for the American people to know who is giving that kind of money to their President? Will you disclose the contributions as they come in? And will you place any restriction on who gives money and how much they can give?
BUSH: No, yes, no, yes. [laughter] Next question. [laughter] I haven't -- phew, man. You obviously haven't asked a question in a long time. It was like, you know, -- one, I haven't seen the final budget. Two, as Donnie Evans said, who is the chairman of the foundation, we'll look at the disclosure requirements and make a decision. You know, here's -- there's a lot of people -- or some people; I shouldn't say "a lot" -- some people who like to give and don't particularly want their names disclosed, whether it be for this foundation or any other foundation. And so we'll take that into consideration.
Thirdly -- and what was the other?
QUESTION: Any restrictions on who can give? Will you take foreign money for this?
BUSH: Yes, I'll probably take some foreign money, but don't know yet, Ken. We just haven't -- we just announced the deal and I, frankly, have been focused elsewhere, like on gasoline prices and, you know, my trip to Africa, and haven't seen the fundraising strategy yet. So the answer to your question, really, I can't answer your question well.

















No, I didn't say it was an inflated story. I said it was put here, on this website, for no other reason than to embarass Bush. It is a perfectly valid story for people to make up their minds about how out of touch Bush is or isn't.
The NY Times article about it was just MMFA's vehicle to get it here.
So, it's a perfectly valid story as told by MMFA. But keeping that in mind as you hoist another WITH trophy, is it a perfectly valid article from the NYT?
In a sunnier, happier America, media organizations like the NYT would be the ones giving us the entire perfectly valid story from which to make up our minds, instead of MMFA finding it necessary to circumvent their mission statement (again) and do it for them.
As a major media entity that is not held within the confines of such a constrictive mission statement, perhaps the NYT wouldn't be accused of a covert effort to embarass Bush if they're giving us the entire perfectly valid story in the first place. Of course, that wouldn't stop the likes of Bill O'Reilly.
I hope Bush doesn't turn his attention to the agriculture markets...
We'll end up paying $10 for a loaf of bread.
He does a fine job all by himself.
LOL... Beat me to the punch Johhny. ;>)
The more I listen to Hillary and Obama speak the more I laugh when I hear Bush. Not that I didn't always laugh... But the thought occurred to me that perhaps it has not been such a bad idea that Bush has refused to talk to problematic foreign leaders. You have to think that when he goes into a room behind closed doors with foreign leaders at least some of them must be thinking "What an idiot!".
this is just an obvious attempt to get this story up here by MMFA, in any way possible, to embarass Bush.
Tommy, Bush is an embarrassment when he opens his mouth period!
Hi Tommy,
I think this story was put here because in one part of the Bush presser he said he had not heard of $4/gallon predictions and acted pretty dismissively towards the point as he had not thought about it. Later, in the same presser, he said when another issue was raised that he had been focusing his energy on other issues "like gas prices."
I thought it would be worth mentioning because he was so dismissive when asked about gas prices directly, but when he needed to sidetrack another issue, he said he had been focusing on gas prices. It was bizarre at best.
"just an obvious attempt to get this story up here by MMFA, in any way possible, to embarass Bush."
Given the myriad of ways that Bush has told the American people to go **** themselves combined with his term finally winding down, I doubt that it's possible to embarrass him to any further extent. If that's truly MMFA's intent, it's a wasted effort.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
Tommy, please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We elect two Texas oil men that take office when a barrel of oil was only $25 to see that same barrel of oil now a historic $100 a barrel, and you think he is not aware of the price of gasoline. You think their leadership had nothing to do with it? Really!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This may have been something that illuded your keen perceptions, but the 2-1 Democratic turn-out to Republicans in the primaries/caucusses will not have any problem connecting these dots!
You amaze me sometimes Tommy. You are willing to concede that these men had nothing to do with the price of oil, while he's kissing the Prince of Saudi Arabia like they were family, while our economy, military, and democracy are driven into the abyss, you behave as though he has nothing to do with it!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Not that it matters but this is the first I heard of it. And I just bought a new truck. *sigh*
I wonder how will this be spun......
Our president..... appearantly the most powerful person on earth.....
He claims to not have known about $4.00 a gallon or more for gas and then minutes later claims to have spent time dealing with the gas price issue.......
Explain to me again how this piece of work holds the 'highest' office of our country??
I wonder how will this be spun......
At this point, his handlers are just watching the clock or have already hit the showers, like bench players for the 97-98 Golden State Warriors.
The "oil situation" will never stabilize until the day that we can tell the Arab nations, "thanks, but no thanks, we don't need it anymore."
I don't see that day coming during my lifetime.
And if you can remember during this news conference he was also giving Obama "some advice".
FRightening,and the press they just there and smile and laugh .
I am not usually a defender of the New York Times, but it seems that if Media Matters wants to cite this as an inconsistency, that they ought to provide some evidence that $4/gal gasoline was likely. The highest administration estimates I have seen is for a peak at $3.40/gal. To someone who is paying close attention to administration estimates of gas prices, $3.40/gal is nowhere near $4/gal.
Furthermore, it would be horrible journalism for the Times to have inserted editorial criticism of the press conference minutes within an article whose subject matter was an objective report.
It will be interesting to see if average gasoline prices peak at anything close to the $4 figure that Media Matters assumes (without providing any supporting evidence of any kind) will be reached.