Bush event misrepresented audience, page 1

I wouldn't be too surprised if this was true. Stage managing events is pretty common, as ever it's all about the image and how you want to be seen, not how you are.

Found a reference to this story at the end of an article praising Bush for his 'advancement' in his oratorical style.

"The experts say that many of Bush's speaking events seem carefully stage-managed -- further evidence of how much work goes into shaping the public's impression of him.

"That trip to the aircraft carrier was a clear manipulation," said Miles Patterson, chairman of the psychology department of the University of Missouri at St. Louis. He cited Bush's use of macho military trappings as a textbook example of "image management."

White House personnel even told people who sat behind Bush during a recent visit to Indiana to remove their neckties so they would look more like "ordinary people" on television, according to WISH-TV in Indianapolis.

"When the guy from the White House tells you to take your tie off, you don't ask why," said Brian Bosma, the state Legislature's House Republican leader.

www.newhousenews.com...

It's nothing new from the Bush administration (they're not alone though).

This from the Washington post in July '99:

"...marvelled at the efficiency of the nascent Bush operation, saying the staging of events was "at almost a White House level of execution."

His campaign is carefully stage-managed. Outside of the fund-raising events populated by thousands of wealthy contributors, Bush's public schedule was designed to put him in settings with audiences that produced visual images of a candidate reaching out to minority children. The photos sent just the signals Bush's campaign had hoped for, prompting a southern Democrat traveling in California last week to say the coverage of Bush there was "like the pope in south Texas."

A piece from Pravda (yeah, yeah, I know, but do you expect to hear it from the U.S media?) On Bush's economic forum in August '02:

"The list of invitees guaranteed that there would be no serious debate, let alone criticism of Bush-s economic policies. Excluded were any of the 2 million workers who have been thrown out of work since last year or those who have seen their 401(k) retirement benefits wiped out on the stock market. Nor were any small investors, defrauded by Enron, WorldCom and other companies, present at the event to voice their anger.

Instead the White House handpicked the 250 participants, which included corporate executives? Most of whom had donated hefty sums to Bush and the Republican Party. In addition, there were the heads of investment firms and small business owners, with the requisite representation of black and Hispanic entrepreneurs. The ordinary workers, whom Bush acknowledged had opinions too, were in fact mostly labor bureaucrats from the Teamsters and carpenters unions, which have close ties to the White House.

Not surprisingly, the consensus among this crowd was that the economy, while having some problems, was heading in the right direction under the leadership of President Bush"

And does anyone remember the Administrations refusal for Bush to do a speech to the E.U unless he received a standing ovation and a guarantee of no heckling or protests? Needless to say it didn't happen.

It's all just another branch in the big tree of propaganda.

[Edited on 2-6-2003 by kegs]