I notice that many people aren't

[justsam]

as interested in the Russet-Bush interview now that they have found out that it is not live.. I don't understand why Russet would agree to such a sham although i don't believe there is an expert lighting director yet to keep Bushs face from going white-purple- blue and his eyes would be blinking so fast that Russet would be able to feel the draft if the right questions are asked

[thedudeingeorgia]

1. I bet Bush knew what the questions were before they were asked....

I bet that Bush knew what the questions were and I am sure that Russert tossed some mild softballs his way....unlike his treatment of Bill McBride, the unsuccessful Democratic candidate for the governor's race in Florida in 2002. In a debate that year, Russert went out of his way to hammer McBride with difficult questions, while Jeb got softballs tossed his way.

It would not surprise me if the same happens in the Bush interview...

[izzie]

2. I can see why as they both Jeb and George answer so silly.

You almost want to protect someone that gives those answers.

[JohnyCanuck]

3. I sent Russert the link to "How to spot a liar"

at Take Back The Media http://www.takebackthemedia.com/liar.html and suggested he study it so he'll know if the Chimp tries to tell any nose stretchers during the intervew. However I am quite sure Karl made Russert aware his job will be to make the Chimp look as good as possible under the circumstances and not to go after the truth if it means embarrassing Boy Blunder.

[Bob3]

4. To heck with the interview I want to see the outtakes.

Uhhh ahh - well - mmmm - up well - ah - now ahh mmm- that's that's ahh ahh ummm well - ah - ump ahh.

And so on.

[jmags]

5. If only there was a GWB on Meet the Press - Too Hot for TV! dvd

[eaprez]

6. There is still an upside.

The WH must be pretty worried to be doing this interview at all.
He's not doing it because he's adored by the masses. He's doing it because he's in trouble.

[Moderator]

7. Locking. Redundant, and ...

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.

4. The subject line and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation.

5. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

6. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator