Below The Beltway

Several bloggers are writing this morning about this New York Times article by Alexandra Stanley about last night’s interview of President & Laura Bush on Larry King Live

As a few people have correctly pointed out this morning, the article was an attack on both the President and Larry King:

Two kinds of celebrities go on “Larry King Live” on CNN: those with something to sell and those with something to hide.

Al Gore and Brandon Routh, the young star of the newly released “Superman Returns,” recently appeared on the show to promote their new movies. The second category includes guests like Star Jones Reynolds, Mary Kay Letourneau, and, right after his indictment in 2004, Kenneth L. Lay of Enron. “Larry King Live” is the first stop in any damage control operation ? a chance to explain oneself to the least contentious journalist in the land.

And that is why President Bush invited the CNN talk show host to the White House on his 60th birthday. The standoff with North Korea over its missile tests, the war in Iraq and ever-sliding ratings in the polls have given the president little reason to celebrate. Mr. King gave the president a chance to defend his policies without risk of interruption or follow-up.

This much I agree with. When it comes to substance, Larry King is a horrible interviewer. He asks softball questions and almost never follows up or challenges a guest, no matter what they say. I’m not sure what he did to prepare for his interview with the President, but, in the past, he has prided himself on the fact that, when he interviews an author, he never reads the book before hand.

So, did the Bush Administration choose to give King an interview because they knew it would be an easy ride ? Probably. You won’t catch Bush showing up on The O’Riley Factor (although why anyone goes on that show is beyond me) and his past interviews with the likes of Tim Russert have been far more in-depth.

That said, I agree with Alexandra when she characterizes Stanley as being unfairly critical of both the President and Larry King. For one thing, the assertion that Bush took a soft ball interview from King (and that, to be honest, is exactly what it was) to boost his poll numbers is an absurd assertion given thte fact that King’s ratings aren’t that high at all. This morning, most Americans have no idea that Bush was even on television last night.

But, then again, its the New York Times, what else do you expect ?

There is one thing that struck me while watching the last half-hour or so of the interview last night; Bush does alot better in one-on-one situations like this than when he has to speak off the cuff to larger groups. For the most part, for example, none of his press conferences have been all that memorable. On the other hand, I’ve seen him interviewed one-on-one by someone as demanding as Tim Russert and he comes off looking great.

More coverage from Ann Althouse and James Joyner