At least this time the reporters seem to have the guts to ask hard questions, but Bush is still reading the names from a carefully chosen list, and he is not allowing follow-ups–he even shut down a reporter a few minutes ago, telling him, “you’re finished!”

And Bush’s answers are still as lame, if not more so. One he just answered was on the rather embarrassing fact that despite two major tax cuts and a third coming through now, the economy is still in the basement and deficits are soaring. He started out by saying that the economy started to turn in March 2000–then paused, with a smirk, expressing the smug, unspoken thought that it was all Clinton’s fault–then went on to list things that depressed the economy, including corporate scandals, and ending with an accusation of the news networks for broadcasting, “road to war, road to war,” which brought the whole store down.

Of course, let us not forget that Bush himself talked down the economy a great deal for a year before he took office (to help him win the election), and for some time after that (to help him sell his tax cut), during which time, he stressed that the economy was in trouble and we were entering a recession–hardly conducive to bringing the economy up. The corporate scandals were to a great degree due to his own party’s policies on corporate self-regulation, not to mention the biggest crooks (still not under arrest) were Bush’s biggest backers. And the “road to war” chant was being pushed by no one more than Bush himself. For him to use these points to excuse himself is ludicrous.

All of that aside from the point that Bush did not answer the question–why his tax cuts were not working. Most have taken place after the events he said were causing the economy to dip–indeed, some were reasons he used to sell the tax cuts–but nonetheless, his tax cuts were supposed to power us out of and above these issues.

Another reporter asked about the “16 words,” and if he took responsibility for it. Bush, clearly prepared for this question, replied that he takes “personal responsibility” for all the statements he made. Which I suppose is why he blames the CIA and George Tenet, why he blamed the British, and why he blamed Stephen Hadley–anyone but himself. So if he is personally responsible, and everyone else had profusely apologized, then where is Bush’s apology? He says he is taking responsibility, but like so much else he says and does for the cameras, it is only for show. It means nothing and carries no weight; such “personal responsibility” is empty.

At least twice in the conference, when defending the Iraq war and the lack of any evidence Bush pushed the war with, he cited the 12 resolutions from the U.N. against Iraq, as if he greatly respected the U.N. and considered them experts on what to do about Iraq. Then he trotted out, for the umpteenth time, the stale rationale that Saddam gassed his own people, saying this time that it was proof that Hussein did have a weapons program. But that was 15 years ago, when Saddam was still our pal. Bush knows full well that the point is whether or not Hussein had a program this year, when Bush claimed he had massive stockpiles.

(By the way, check out this rather interesting article by a former CIA senior analyst on Iraq, which not only clarifies that the villagers were killed in the crossfire between Iraq and Iran, and were not simply murdered by Hussein as Bush asserts, but that it may well have been Iran, and not Iraq, who gassed them. Of course, I would fully expect Bush to shamelessly take advantage of this, and, ignoring the hypocrisy, use it as an excuse to invade Iran.)

So much more–his answer to the question on homosexuality, starting his answer by saying “we’re all sinners,” clearly stating that he believes just being gay a moral crime, followed by his expected stance that homosexual couples must be barred from marrying. As if a gay couple taking the vows will harm the sanctity of marriage, while apparently heterosexual abuse of marriage, such as sky-high divorce rates, spousal and child abuse, and marriages of convenience are of no consequence and need no special action.

The whole process was sickening, right up to his final whimper of an answer at the end about the California recall vote being funded by a right-winger who wanted to take the governorship for himself; among other things, Bush was thankful that Texas had no recall vote, tried to claim that the recall was because of the people’s choice, then said he had no comment.

Like I said, at least there were some hard questions here, but it was still less than a real press conference–and Bush’s replies predictably vacillated between dishonest and lame, too much to comment on fully in one go. Which means, of course, that the press should announce it to be a complete success.