Politics of Bush address debated

WASHINGTON – As White House officials sought approval from television executives for a prime-time broadcast of President Bush’s Oval Office address commemorating the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, they said publicly the speech would steer clear of politics.

As late as Sunday, as Bush prepared for a raft of Sept. 11 ceremonies, White House press secretary Tony Snow told reporters that the address was “not going to be a political speech – there are no calls to action, there are no attempts to segregate Democrats from Republicans.”

But Bush’s stout defense of his policies in Iraq – as well as his suggestion that a united front was needed – sent Democrats scrambling to issue late-night responses and prompted at least one network to adjust its programming to make time for political analysis. And the issue continued Tuesday, as debate flared over whether Bush politicized a day set aside for memorials and reflection.

The dispute erupted just eight weeks before voters decide which party will control Congress for Bush’s final two years in office and underscored how each side is vying to make an issue of national security.

The rhetoric escalated in the aftermath of Bush’s Monday night speech. For instance, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., accused Republicans of employing “cynical tactics” to scare voters, while House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, wondered aloud whether Democrats were “more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people.”

Democrats pressed their case that the White House had misrepresented the tenor of Bush’s speech, causing the broadcast networks to give him a prime-time slot without allotting time for an opposition response or interviews with Democrats.

Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., mailed letters to network news executives on Tuesday asking for more coverage of the views of Democrats as part of reporting on Bush’s war-related speeches.

Bush mused Tuesday about the dispute over his speech, telling a group of conservative columnists during an Oval Office interview that he would have been attacked either way.

“Imagine what they would have said if I hadn’t talked about Iraq – ‘failed policy, won’t talk about it,’ ” he said, according to an account posted on the National Review Online Web site.

The first indication that Monday night’s address might go beyond a Sept. 11 commemoration came about three hours before Bush delivered it, when the White House press office distributed excerpts. The speech included one line declaring that winning the war on terror “will require the determined efforts of a unified country” and that Americans “must put aside our differences and work together to meet the test that history has given us.”

Still, the excerpts contained no mentions of Iraq – and the headline on the news release alerted reporters only that Bush’s speech would “remember those who lost their lives five years ago today and pay tribute to the heroes whose acts of courage that day saved so many lives,” and reflect on “what September 11th has meant to America and how we can move forward together to win the War on Terror.”

But Bush wasted little time in his 17-minute speech before turning to the oft-repeated lines of his election-year speeches defending the invasion of Iraq.

“I’m often asked why we’re in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks,” he said. “The answer is that the regime of Saddam Hussein was a clear threat. … The world is safer because Saddam Hussein is no longer in power.”

Bush went on to quote al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden predicting defeat in Iraq would mean America’s “defeat and disgrace forever,” a line he often uses to criticize Democrats who have endorsed a timetable for withdrawing troops. “The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad,” Bush declared.

Once Bush’s intentions were clear, NBC changed plans and allowed time after the speech for analysis. During that segment, NBC’s Washington bureau chief Tim Russert predicted that Democrats would accuse Bush of playing “politician in chief.”

A network news executive, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of relations with the White House, said Tuesday that the speech would prompt greater scrutiny of future White House requests for air time.

Reid, on the Senate floor, recalled that Sept. 11 had “brought America together like never before.” He said that when Bush, a few days after the attack, “stood upon that mound of rubble at ground zero with bullhorn in hand, he spoke for all of us” in pledging retribution against the assault’s plotters.

But Reid added that Monday night, “The president spoke for his administration, not for the nation. No bullhorn, only the bully pulpit of his office, which he used to defend an unpopular war in Iraq and to launch clumsily disguised barbs at those who disagree with his policies there.”

Snow on Tuesday stood by his characterization of the speech as nonpolitical – in the sense that Bush did not specifically argue that Democrats opposing his Iraqi policies are jeopardizing America’s security, as he does on the campaign trail.