one? >> i think an effective press able toy is one that is present information in an basis, innd timely response to reporter's queries. i think a press secretary has to be able to persuade people within the white house to provide him or her with accurate information. because, often, they will try holding back. because they think there is some bad news, and maybe if they just need quiet, it will go away. it does not go away. >> let me put in example on the table. an example of what was going on during the clinton administration, we all know in january 1998, the story broke of the president's relationship with monica lewinsky, but the

details were trickling out. this was in the very early stage moving thernet, story out before it was published in the magazine. that was a watershed moment. >> it really was. it was a difficult story to deal with at the white house. a -- made a did decision early on that this story was going to just drown out anything else they were doing. one of the decisions they made about which was an effective way of dealing with as much as they could, was to take the questions out of the briefing room. and it be a legal question, then have the counsel's office be the one that responded. the counsel's office then hired

someone he -- hired somebody, jim kennedy, who was the indications person, and i do not think he was a lawyer, but he was the one who would deal with those questions. because, if it was dealt with day after day after day am a as ultimately was in the briefing room, it would crowd everything they were doing. it kind of mirrored what it was tak was onesident's this, which was to show up for work every day, and talk about what he was doing for the american public. he obviously did not want to answer questions, so they had many fewer press conferences, and short question and answer sessions. you had pictures of him every day showing up for work. even though the headline on the picture was the president showed up again and write up -- and spite of the monica lewinsky

thing about you often had a message that was in front of him which would say balanced budget. good look ateaders the picture and see the president was talking about the budget. if they wanted to not pay any to the monica lewinsky story, the white house tried alternate ways of renting other kinds of information, which was pretty good. the young man wanted to know from the washington center, about press secretaries who were most effective. i think mike mccurry definitely stands out in the clinton administration. james haggerty in the eisenhower administration. to trying tomitted find out what the real story was, and not just take it from

what the white house officials that but find out in a way they were sure that they were providing accurate information. that often is a difficult thing to do. >> keep in mind, mike mccurry was the individual is possible for opening up the briefings, because it used to be that the first five to 10 minutes was open to cameras, and then the entire briefing, i think mike mccurry later regretted that his ravings became desperate things became part of the news networks that we were hearing. listen carefully to the question asked by members of the white house press corps, and then listen how mike mccurry calibrates his spot. >> the president does not need documents to tell the american people what his relationship was with monica lewinsky. so why -- >> that was the only question to be asked, the president asked

death answered that to satisfaction yesterday. you know that there would be a lot more follow-up questions that we would want to be able to answer. has she confirmed that lewinsky came in to visit her late at night? >> i'm not going to go into the substance of things. people come in here and see folks on or not all the time, and people waved people in for a variety of reasons. we are as ugly information related to the times when mrs. lewinsky would be here at the white house. >> how is the president going to give his answers? if you going to go before the american people in some way? >> he will try to do what is appropriate at the right time, and we will not be able to give

you the answer until we get the information we are looking for. and people are confused as to what the president is actually denying when he said the allegations are false. does he mean that the allegations are false that he had an affair, or that the allegations are false that he would try to encourage anyone to lie? >> both. >> the president yesterday said that he had not encouraged anyone to tell a falsehood, he repeated that again today. , thate aware yesterday the president had talked to monica lewinsky, and he dodged that question. thate president has said those are legitimate questions, he will have to answer them. she worked here, and we have all talked to her at some point because she worked here in the west wing frequently in the time that she was here. we want to make sure that we have answers that are complete. the whole conversation i might have had, thus the president recall speaking to her

about being reached out to my the legal defense team? >> the president is going to have a lot of answers to questions like this at the protime, we are not going to answer them piecemeal, because you have all more than reminded us that half of a story is not as good as a complete story. we need to make sure that the people's memories are accurate, we need to make sure that we have the and permission -- the information that we will need to pursue for the follow-up questions. >> a lot going on. the firstnd, this was 48 hours of the story breaking, so a lot of questions. what is mike mccurry's job there? >> his job is to say as little as possible. he did not stay with one reporter. he wanted to keep control over the room. that is one of the things that is so interesting, is to watch how he worked. he always maintained control of the room.

he was well respected, and people let him do that. but there were so many people wanting to ask questions, he could go from one to the other, and nobody would really get any good film that they could use. words that would justthe news other than his general response. >> let's get to some questions. george mason university? question,have a quick i cannot resist asking martha, are you saying that mike mccurry were doing his -- was doing a drop well because he avoided saying anything? -- numbernot have the one, he did not have the information, and he did not want the information. further, he did not want it. too,ave to think in terms

of his being effective for his president. he was not going to get any early -- any an information out of the president early on. i think he tried as hard as he could to get what the real story was, but that was something that was long in coming. i do not mean to shortchange my students, we have a question from lauren. the new senate filibuster rules, do you think that the resident will now have a strategic opportunity to fix his healthcare.gov agenda with an energy regulation agenda that would affect his public opinion polls? efficiency as important as health care?

>> i think it is going to make a real difference as to the appointments he has. first up is going to be the circuit courts of appeal. if you look at his judgeships, his areas of greatest his attention has been focused on the circuit court of appeals rather than the district court because he figures that is the place where he can make a difference as far as the court system is concerned. then, with the executive branch appointments, there is a real stack up there, where there of the visions where we do not have confirmed people the agency just has difficulty doing its job. many vacancies in top

positions that were deputy secretary, and undersecretary, and there was an official that came in the fall for a world bank meeting, and he went back and complained at the u.k. saying there is nobody there, there was nobody to talk to. when you are in a financial crisis, you cannot afford to be in that sort of situation. true, and a lot of departments do not have their people. part of it it was that the ministration had not sent them forward. as think as far as his agenda, he will be able to move it better, because he will have more people in it. he is certainly going to have a lot of conflict with the senate as well. he has been interested in using regulations and rules,

relations, an executive order in the environment because there is going to be little action on the hill. he tried that early on, but it's not fair to well-paid court -- well. fastesident obama is approaching his sixth year of presidency. bush, ando president a fierce critic in regards of --in afghanistan. >> you're going to be sorry. >> let me take it back. yourwould like to ask you, decision to invade iraq, millions of americans and iraqis

, aramaic reason given publicly has ruined -- turned out not to be true. why did you really want to go to war? from the moment you stepped into house,h -- the white what was your real reason? it did not have living to do with oil, or anything else? with respect to your question, i do not want war. to assume that i wanted war, is flat wrong, helen, in all due respect. hold on a second. excuse me. no president wants war. everything you may have heard is that, but it is simply not true. defense of about the this country changed on september the 11th. vowede got attacked, i

then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the market people -- the american people. started with a little bit of levity, went very serious, and then stern and angry. >> she had been talking to him about calling on her, and he had mentioned that he would call on her. she had done the same thing with clinton at a correspondent associations dinner, and when he called on her, she said you're going to be sorry. and both of them were. in bush's case he was very angry, and i do not believe he called on her again. secretariesny press

about -- in the same way, about why we were at war. particularly because of the weapons of mass destruction did not turn out to be there. and he thought that she was this respectful, and respect was important to him. when he said, with all due respect, then you know he is really angry. it is like clinton used to say, sir or ma'am. you knew he was very angry also. question turn to a from students at purdue university. clinton also said i like your tie and he meant something quite different. >> he used to say i like your pin toi like women. >> i am enjoying this, and i

think your insights are tremendous, and the students are getting a lot out especially with what you said about mike mccurry who had most level temperament of any press secretary ever. not surprisingly, is now in divinity school. we're going to go next to molly. >> hi, molly. >> hi. do you believe the high level of scrutiny placed on the president is conducive to an effective are negative there aspects to the presidency? balance it is important to have, and it is not just the president. it is all parts of government. itis important that we have on congress and maybe even on the courts as well would do us well to be able to see their

operations. ely we learn things that make us not happy, things look in efficient, but i think it is important to get a sense for us as voters as much of what of what we can know about a president as the decision-maker. the questions last week at the briefing, major garrett trying to get at did he know about the website, and if he did not, that tells us something. if he did and had been telling ableat we were going to be to choose our own doctor and it was going to be like amazon and kayak, then it is important to get that sense. they have given us a little more information than we have had in the past in that the white house

is now providing a list of visitors. students of communications, one of the things you can do, which i will admit to doing quite often and is trying to figure out who is coming in for off the record sessions. i can get a good sense of the columnists, that the president and a nice test you can do for your self is go and see which columnist came in and then look at the articles they wrote afterwards. on the table that because the president has been meeting with more progressive liberal columnists over the last 24th hours to talk about iran. it would interesting to see what they are writing about. that will be tomorrow or wednesday or thursday. >> unfortunately, you cannot get the waive list, as it is called, of the people coming in excess

twice a year, and it is a six -- month delay. it will be six months before you can get seats. you can go back and get some others. trying to find out his often record sessions is one of the things that i try to do, either by getting people to tell me and then tell me who was in the room and that i get somebody else to tommy that they talk about here -- tell me what they talked about. one day i was standing in the back, because i noticed people were dressed more fancy than they normally are, and there was a group clustered at the front and it was not briefing time. i knew they were going in to see the president. i took note of who all of them were, because i have a list of people i put together of interviews, all the interviews that the president has, but the off the record things are trigger. they are very interesting for you to study, to see if there is

that the president has honest people, because one of the things that the columnists will not say, because it is off the record, is they will not say that they talked to the president. me, that is something that i find disturbing, because the president had an opportunity to talk to them and we do not know about it. -- that stayurdue with purdue, another question. >> we're going to let frank speak. >> in your opinion, what president was the best in you lies in the press to his advantage and what qualities does he have that others seem to lack? >> thanks, frank. >> a good question, frank. in recent presidents, i would .ay president reagan and i think one of the things

that is really helpful is when you come in with a clear agenda, caseyou -- in reagan's everybody knew what reagan was going to do. and what he was interested in. he was interested in tax cuts, theet cuts, buildup of military, privatizations of some of the government work, and defeat the soviet union. so he came in with an advantage. say, president obama comes in slogan of hope and change, and people do not have anywhere near the sense of what he was going to do as, say, with the case for reagan, because reagan had been running a long time. of how tod a sense communicate his message very effectively. actor, andhe was an he knew that medications was

important, and he wanted to put together a team that would be effective in sending out the messages that he wanted and in shaping them as well, and also he wanted to be effective in governing. and i think the more effective you are in governing, the easier your communications is going to be. what decision he made that few presidents make is he brought in as his chief of staff somebody who was an outhouse there -- an outsider to him, james baker. james baker had organized for insident ford's campaign 1976 against ronald reagan. yet he was willing to go to somebody who was working for the other side within the party, because he knew that baker to washington and he knew what his

own limits were, that he needed to have people who had a good understanding of washington. and i think there are few presidents that are willing to a that, to see the staff as complement to them, that is, fill in their weaknesses, rather than has your flexion of him. because most presidents want to bring in their people from the campaign and people they are people whoather than are versed in governing, particularly from the white house or from an administration. >> which was one of the mistakes of the carter administration, wasn't it? deal ofr had a great difficulty with that because it took him several years to bring wexler,le like ann somebody who was a very effective washington player who had a consulting company.

and she had worked on the hill. when she came in in the communications and in the public liaison, she was able to pull interest troops together for and wasike salt treaty very effective. but at the beginning he did not bring them in. i think in obama's case, if you look at the communications operations, the press operations, it has been uphill since the beginning of the second term only people who were on the campaign. you need to have a sense of what governing -- in governing, how you move from one coalition to another, and then you cannot oford to be hypercritical your opponents on the hill in a particular issue come in because you made the them on another one two weeks down the road. >> meaning to underscore the point about having someone to

consummate the deal's in areas where you know might be a potential returns. you brought up rating, so let me give you an example. one of the most memorable speeches by ronald reagan took 1980 four.ne of this is the 40th anniversary of the d-day invasion. many veterans were getting up there in years, and yet he went back to normandy, and look at the picture. this is michael weaver with the background. the simplicity of the backdrop, but the world's that -- words that rivaled reagan delivered in june, 1984. lonely,and on a windswept point on the northern shore of france. the air is soft, but four years ago at this moment, the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and there were of can. morning of the 225 rangerse, 1944, jumped off a bridge landing

craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs. their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion. to climb these sheer and deficit -- desolate coast and take up the enemy guns. the allies were told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here, and they would be trained on the each is to stop the allied advance. the rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers, at the edge of the cliffs, shooting down at them with machine guns and throwing grenades. and the american rangers began to climb. they shot rope ladders over the face of these cliffs and began to pull themselves up. when one ranger fell, another would take his place. when one rope was cut, a ranger would grab another and begin his climb again. and climbed, shot back, held their footing. soon, one by one, the rangers andthemselves over the top in seizing the firm land of the top of these cliffs, they began to seize back the continent of europe. 225 came here.

after two days of fighting, only 90 and still bear arms. and behind me is a memorial that symbolizes the ranger daggers that were thrust into the tops of these cliffs, and before me, are the men who put them there. --ese are the boys of [applause] men who took the cliffs. these are the champions who helped free a continent. the are the -- these are the heroes who helped end a war. >> in terms of messaging, your thoughts? --has a fantastic speech that is a fantastic speech. it is not surprising in a way because reagan put a lot of and iion to his speeches, have been going through his personal diary and also the diary that was kept by the

national archives official, who was prized -- who was called the presidential direst who brings together the secret service reports, comings and goings of meetings, and one of the things you can't see is he met regularly with his speechwriter. one of them said he would talk about the next week's speech, which once he thought were going to be the important ones for him, and he would critique their speeches and do it in a like manner to way. -- light-mannered way. one of the things i have done is gone back to the reagan library and looked at some of his speeches. i looked at the speech he gave to the houses of parliament. and i have focused on files that are marginal note files. so do you see his own handwriting. you can see all the work he did on that speech. somebody else they have laid it his meetings,gh

he would have talked about what he wanted, and then he went through -- and the comments he made i thought were particularly good for the year. he had a good -- -- for the ear. he had a good sense of language, how would it sound. wereuld make changes that euphonious, that would sound good to the aer. one of the things-- to the ear. one of the things that michael deaver did, is he stopped on the weekends that the president needed to do, and he always liked radio, so that he suggested to reagan that he do a saturday radio address. and the president, i could see him going through his files, wrote them himself. at the beginning, they were done live. usually from camp david. and he would choose a topic and write it out by hand.

ice and that would be part of the weekend news coverage. you wrote until 1980, an address for cbs radio. >> and he started with radio in iowa. let's go to george mason university for another question. >> a quick comment, talking about the back of the simplicity of the elements of the sea and the sky and the monolith behind reagan, i was struck. n might have seemed dwarfed, but he's in to be a large fight. alls astounding because that you take for granted goes into how you perceive the speech. >> that's true, but we tend to elect taller people. >> so that helped. >> a question from paula. >> hi. with the rise of the 24/7 new cycle, what is the best way for

the white house and press secretary to keep up and have effective communication in this rapidly challenging -- changing environment? >> it is definitely a challenge because there's so much information coming into the wife house, but there are also -- into the white house, but there are also citizens. there is so much that we receive and what we need to do and what the white house needs to do is help us understand what is all up -- what does all this mean and why is it important for us. i think that sometimes white by allare overwhelmed the information that comes in, and i think particularly with this white house, that it has been so interested in social media, they used very effectively when they were on the campaign, and i think that they found that governing is a -- different than claiming campaigning when it comes to social media, because you get so

many criticisms, whether it is twitter -- the president can be speaking and you can see deck light upeet with comments, often negative ones, by their critics. isi think the real challenge really focusing on what does it all mean and how should we try to filter the information that is coming to us. >> derek from the university of theh florida, part of "washington journal" program. this is during the early stages of the 1988 residential campaign . vice president george herbert walker bush a lot of questions about his involvement in the iran contra scandal, which was one of the lack marks in the second term of president reagan 's eight years in office. and the question is what did you know and when did you know it.

keep in mind that george herbert walker bush knew these questions were going to come up. he and his staff insisted on doing this interview live instead of having a taped it to me that they knew cbs would then just use excerpts are it i want to play this. this is only two minutes of what is a 14 1/2 minute exchange between dan rather and george herbert walker bush. then your reaction and questions. >> mr. vice president, the president has said he wants all the facts have paid he gave up such things in his own diary. every principal including -- >> [indiscernible] dan, be careful here -- >> i want you to be careful -- the problem is he said repeatedly in meetings, you said in a meeting in which secretary schultz in the most forceful way raised these objects. >> if it was the most forceful way -- i have heard george be

very forceful, and i were there and he was very forceful, at that meeting, i would have her member that. i do not remember that. >> you cannot remember it, but other people in the media -- >> at that point -- i'm just saying i do not remember it. >> i do not mean to be argumentative. >> i want to talk about why i want to be president, why those 41% of the people are supporting me. [indiscernible] it's not fair to judge my career by a rehash on iran. how would you like it if i judged your career by those seven minutes when you walked off the set in new york? would you like that? i do not have respect for what you're doing tonight. agree thatyou would your qualification for president and what kind of leadership you bring to the government, is much more important than what you just referred to. i'm trying to set the record

straight. >> i came here to talk about the record. >> i'm trying to set the record. [indiscernible] sending missiles to the ayatollah of around. ,ou were supposed to -- you are you are a terrorist expert. karen was officially a terror state. you went around telling -- [indiscernible] you --ld the question is what does that tell us about your record? >> it was the same reason the president signed on to it. >> part of a much longer interview. rather ran 1987 dan offset because he was upset because it cut into the cbs evening news. they went into the cb as evening -- cbs evening news but it was an empty anchor desk. i was the reference for those of you not old enough to remember.

let me turn to derek, your comment, your thoughts? >> from a public image perspective, i think is bad for president bush because instead of leading the interview he was answering the questions that dan rather had. weaker from his perspective and his standpoint. >> justin your thoughts? >> i think anytime you come off as defensive in an interview, particularly that interview so hostile, you lose your credibility, and especially if you knew this lessons were coming. that was a bad image maker for him, in the moment, especially in the middle of an election. it was to avoid, especially if you are in a president being that defensive, it will have a negative effect on public opinion. our guest. back to as you look back and rim are that exchange from 1988, what do you think?

>> i was watching from my crib, steve. well, a couple of thoughts on that. i mean, george h.w. bush ended up winning that election, didn't he? a harsh exchange. dan rather did have a reputation as being a that of a hit ball -- a pit bull in injuries. was the interview dell advised? -- ill advised? going armed with ammo into the interview, the seven minutes reference, so he expected it to be contentious. i think that those who would be impartiality, if that is possible, may have said that dan rather may have overstepped in again trying to take over -- trying to suck up all the oxygen in the room. if you ask a question, you have to allow your subject time to

answer it, and we did not see that. we saw back and forth, talking over the stuff that became fashionable in the crossfire type programs, and it has become a true annoyance. this is a format that was pioneered by "nightline." i work for ted koppel as his producer and writer there. it was not to be that way. it was meant to allow an exchange, not babble. thes paul harvey would say, rest of this jury, the person behind that camera, advising george herbert walker bush, reminding him to bring up the therrence to dan raat walking off the sentiment was roger ailes, resident and ceo of the fox news channel. >> i have got to george h.w. bush's diary because it is available. that is the one kept by the national archives. roger ailes talked to him a lot. some advice took

from him. i think it was very ill advised to have agreed to that interview. number one, do not -- it looked like he had gone to their studio him although they had a studio in the old executive office building. but i think he should have found the format that was comfortable for him. for example, president obama does interviews with "60 minutes," and he will do long- form once. let's say, he talks to steve kroft for maybe 48 minutes. but he doesn't at the white house, and he may have to answer some tough questions, but he adds some other ones also, and they use -- they use a good portion of what they videoed. >> although the bush campaign said it did what it did it to do

which is how the base of the party know that george herbert walker bush was standing up to and other liberal icon, which was dan rather of cbs. >> he looked like he was losing his temper. their like to think president is cool, that he is calm, and he is going to be very reason. and not shoot from the hip. >> good point. a question from the washington center, go ahead, please. comingthank you for today. i was wondering what has been the experience facing and interviewing and managing the president situation? how did you handle that situation? how do you overcome that? >> hmm. i guess the most difficult thing is not once you get the talk,iew, getting them to

because usually they have agreed. interview,eed to the then it is a matter of putting the information together to ask questions that are going to elicit information. but i think the hardest thing is getting interviews, that sometimes people are resistant and you have to wait a long time. there was an official in the bush administration that i tookd to talk to who had me four years to get. i would try in different ways. i tried having his people who were at a higher bit of senior- level tell him he could talk. and one day i saw him to the briefing room, and i went over, and he said, i know, i can talk to you. took twook -- it still more years.

and then there was a particular piece of information that i was looking for in a book that i had just finished, which is on the 2000 eight transition. and i was trying to find out about -- the 2008 transition. i was trying to find out what president bush was talking to president elect obama about in their meaning. i knew there were three things. i could find two, but i cannot find the third. it took me four years, but i found it. >> let's go back to george mason university, another question. a this question comes from student. >> hi. many believe that president obama today is not as engaging with the public as he used to be during his first term and definitely not as he was during his campaigns. do you think this is typical of all presidents'second terms, or is there something special about obama? >> interesting point, thank you.

>> i think at the beginning date 10 deuce eight -- at the beginning they tend to speak more to the press because they want to be known to the public, and so they will speak a lot. i would say generally presidents -- i was doing some figures and adding up all the figures i keep to the end of october, and i could see that the number of speeches that he has given he has read deuced the number of speeches -- he has reduced the number of speeches. what he has done is increased the number of interviews he has done over the years. but he liked interviews right off. but one of the things we can see is giving a summary of some of the figures. presidents the about 500 times a year, and no matter whether a democrat or republican, liberal,

or a conservative, they're going to speak about 500 times a year. but how they deal with the press is going to depend on what their and what theyare are comfortable with. example, clinton talked a lot. not only did he give this a number of speeches, but he did short question and answer sessions although time. up to the end of october in his fifth year, clinton had had 731 short question and answer sessions. that is when a pool of reporters goes in and maybe even the wires ask a question at the top. obama does not like that kind of setting. he has had only 119 as opposed clinton's 713.

bush had 384. if you look at the number of interviews they have given, obama has had 741 interviews. torture w bush -- george w. bush had 243. clinton had 207, and reagan had 92. n's stopped inn an april. it has to do with changes in the media. you can see in looking at them, "time" anded to "newsweek," and what obama has done with particular correspondents, like columnists, who are running on a subject that is important to him. he brings in people from local areas. there was a day when he brought in five people, five anchors

from local stations that were affected by the government shut down. so he could target his communications. and so i think targeting patient to you... all the way through, but i do think it is to that probably he has given fewer speeches, and his press d aserences, he has not ha many press conferences. bush in his second term increased the number of his solo press conferences, like he would stand up like obama did recently and answered questions for almost an hour. >> to respond to this next piece of video, you called jimmy carter one of the poorest in the caterers in terms of the modern presidency. this speech from 1979, we talked

about this before. carter never uses the word malaise, but it was dubbed the malaise speech. that's what you portion of it and we will get your reaction. [video clip] >> i know that government actions and legislation can be very important. that is why have worked hard to put my campaign processes -- promises into law, and i have to admit admit -- with mixed success. i have to say to the american people have been reminding again that all the legislatures of the world cannot fix what is wrong with america. so i will speak to you first tonight about a subject even more serious than inflation. i want to talk to you right now about a fundamental threat to american democracy. i do not mean our political and civil liberties. they will endure. and i do not refer to the

outward strength of america, the nation that is at peace tonight, everywhere in the world, but the economic power and military might. invisible is nearly in ordinary ways. it is a crisis of confidence. it is a crisis that strikes at the very heart and soul and spirit of our national world. it is an insidious crisis. about ourabout out unity of purpose for our nation. the erosion of our confidence in the future is threatening to destroy the social and political fabric of america. a reaction turn to from the washington center college. when you see that, this is the third year of the carter

presidency. what are your thoughts? >> i would just say if you wanted a find a way how not to do something, that would probably be the way to go about it, because he talked in the beginning about how we were strong economically, and then he contradicted himself by saying that americans have no confidence, and that is not a very good way to look get reelected. >> anyone from george washington -- mason want to watch -- want to react to that piece of video? >> yes. sean cummings. >> i thought the speech was really welcome post. i was distracted by his use of contacttures and eye which detracted from the. i think he was really unfocused. his eyes were loosing focus with the audience. the actual technique in speaking. >> any reaction to that from july of 1979?

i think art of the problem there was he was laying out a problem that he cannot fix and ,as blaming the public for it it was not tangible. it was something that was more of a personality kind of thing, it was a very weird problem that he is talking about that. that was the problem why it was not working at all. >> it was a speech to came back to hurt him in 1980. >> it did. what a self-inflicted wound. here things were going well what sells is optimism, not pessimism, and to call the american public to be all they can be. and i think in terms of your point is well taken about how he appeared with his hands looking almost the size of his head --

what president since have done since that time, particularly in the last couple of administrations when there is a new kind of wiring in the white alle, the fiber optic drops over, so the president can give speeches from a friday of areas. our presidents do give fewer oval office addresses where they tend to be sitting, looking staff, and their desk looks larger than they are often. is have as done podium in the east room where you can see him walking down the red carpet, and you have much and control over the speech how you look. >> let me compare that speech to president john f. kennedy, a speech he gave in june of 1963, the year in which he was assassinated 50 years ago, a

speech on the nuclear arms race and the soviet union. here's president kennedy from 1963. [video clip] >> i speak of peace as the ofessary rational end rational men. i realize the pursuit of these is not as automatic as the pursuit of war, and frequently the pursuit of war has fallen on deaf ears, that we have no more urgent task. or world government, and that it will be useless until the leaders of the soviet helpfulopt a more attitude. i hope they do. i believe we can help them do it. but i also believe that we must , asxamine our own attitudes individuals, and as a nation, where our attitude is an

extension of theirs, and every graduate of this school, every talk. and wishess of war to bring peace should begin by looking inward, by examining his own attitude, and the possibilities of peace. toward the soviet union, toward the course of the old war, and the pursuit of peace here at home. >> let's go back to all three students. first from the washington center, your reaction. i would say that one was much better because he set out of purpose when he began. >> it was a key speech of his presidency. george mason, student reaction? go ahead. go ahead.

we cannot hear you, so we will go to perdue university -- purdue university. >> he was able to set out more confident ine speaking about what the problem was. obviously jimmy carter was not, and that was a key difference. >> let's go back to george mason. go ahead. hello -- >> hi, sorry about that. i agree it was much more confident. a much more powerful stance could have been taken. >> he was optimistic. he had a call for people to get involved and to try to make peace possible. one of the things that that symbolized really is his call to service, that he thought that people should get involved in their government and that each

individual can make a difference . and he brought a lot of people into government by that call. -- tot me go to segregate zachary from the university of iowa with the next question. >> thank you for being here. you think the media is too hard on our presidents? >> before we get her answer, what do you think? >> i do not think so. i think the media is a good way to check on presidential powers. >> the fourth estate. think we are too hard, and i think the president would do well by providing reporters for more opportunities to question him, because when he throughoutonferences the government, and also short question and answer sessions, if there are problems run the government and people in

departments and agencies are going to inform him because they do not want to be caught in a situation or something is happening and he does not know about it. it is a good way of keeping the communications between the departments, agencies, and the white house going, and it also forces the president to think about the questions that are going to be asked and sharpen up his own thinking. the diaries ofh ronald reagan and george h w bush, one of the things that i was impressed with was how much time they put in to preparing for a press conference. now, in reagan's case, his were almost after the second year most weren't nighttime east room press conferences, something that the networks would not provide today. but he would spend two days working on the preparations. so what that ended up meaning is ont he had special briefings

domestic policy, economic policy, national security, and foreign policy. of it,ould have two days and then they would also do some mock press conferences. bush,ow, in george w. when you saw that he was having a meeting with certain kinds of advisers, like economic advisers and then the next day he was doing national security and foreign policy, you knew that was going to be a time that his advisers would recommend that he wholly press covers because he had it all in his head. i think questioning by reporters is very important, and we cannot have too much of it. >> that is a fair question. w.bush 292 george interviews. the second of the last one that we did, and i asked president bush a similar question, so let's watch. [video clip] >> media, another institution

here, a lot of cable talk shows, i a lot of radio programs, talking about you. do you watch the programs? >> no. >> has immediate cheated you fairly -- has been media treated you fairly? >> my individual relationships with people in the media has been very good, and that is all i can expect. of course, i read what is written, and a lot of times i did not like what is written. then i realize they may not like what i am saying. no complaints. i am not one of these guys who said, oh, man, everybody misunderstood me because of the media. i am a little disappointed at some of the platforms that encourage harsh rhetoric. >> such as? >> bush is a liar.

that if suchto me competition for airspace that some people feel like if they can yell louder with harsher rhetoric, then they will get noticed. the tone has not been good in ve isngton, and i ha appointed and that. you were optimistic you could change the tone in washington, that things happened or reasons, and you hope that the last five weeks would heighten a desire to move beyond the bitterness. >> there was a hopeful person saying that. >> that is hopeful. >> it cannot work out the way i was rubbing it would. the phone -- it changed. now we have no child left behind down, some bipartisan accomplishment, but the rhetoric got very tough. some people in this town use the politics for personal disruption

to advance their agenda. i do not want to sound self- serving, but i have not. i do not think a president should. i was hoping for a better tone, and it did not happen. >> what we tell president elect obama? he will have a democratic senate like you did in 2001, and he is trying to unite the country, like you did? >> i wish them the best. i hope he succeeds. he may be in a position -- maybe he will not have to deal with as contentious issues as i have, but maybe he will. he came in with a strong vote and has good majorities in the house and senate and maybe he will get some things done. from my standpoint, he seemed so dejected at the end of his administration in that interview. >> he did, but let me say first, that interview is one of the best interviews that he did, and it is really one for you all to

look at, because he trusts c- span. he knew he was not going to be hit, and he really was reflective. it is a good the interview, really. it surprised me because i remember how happy he seemed to be getting out. it was like each month he seemed to be happier. but he was not very happy there. there he certainly was very dejected. and i think, when a president runs, he spends a couple of it is just bone crunching the amount of work they have to do to get elected, and so they therefore assume when they come in, things are going to be different. but they really are not. and in reagan's case, reagan gave a speech in december before he left, in which he talked about his disappointments that he was not able to achieve and how interest groups in the media

were part of the iron triangle that he referred to. joseph'sgo to st. university, part of the washington center, and then we will go back to the washington center. secretaries,press the situation with mike mccurry, to anthe block administration. you think that is harmful? >> the press secretary can't the harmful if he lies, which is an absolute killer. they press the enter a lies and is caught at it, the people will not listen to him.

i do not think mccurry lied. he knew what the limitations were of his position. he was not going to be able to get his president to help tell him the full story, and he was not going to get out there and lie. and so what he tried to do was move it out of the room and talk about the climate legislation, all the other things they were working on. a one of the big issues is if press secretary is kept out of the loop because the staff does not want him to lie behind that podium, that gives him deniability, but there is an issue about how close he is to the president because he is not art of these inner sanctum discussions. he gets it either way, doesn't he? >> that his trip. it is certainly difficult decision to be in, -- -- that is true. it is certainly a difficult position to be in. he was not telling anybody. -- pressod present secretary has to be given to do is convince not only the president, but his aides that it

is important to provide information to reporters. and i could see in the bush administration and in the second term, they provided much more information than they did in the first. and this was particularly true because dana perino was part of it, but their communications operation they had an they brought over, a rapid -- a rapid response team where they would write access to information, and it was useful information. it was making their case with hard data. in than they had about 12 different ones in case you missed it which would be maybe an op-ed that somebody wrote, the fact sheets. this fact was one of the ones

that i remember where if they like,t like something, say, they did not like a piece theyhe new york times" would say they're facts are incorrect. the end of think i thought was just particularly useful, and it was sad. .wo people ran that operation a young guy named rob who had worked on the campaign, and he was just crackerjack at it. >> the book is "managing the president's message." netscape russian from george mason. -- let's get a question from george mason. >> in your experience, what do you believe is the fine line between what the american people are informed of and what information is kept inside the white house? >> i think that they should give out as much as they can come and there is a tendency to hold back

on embarrassing information, they think will not be helpful, and those things they need to get out, but they also need to explain programs, even ones that are sensitive intelligence programs. look at what has happened with the snowden case, with all of the information that has come out there and also came out to end, the in the programs were to find by their critics -- were defined by their critics and not by themselves, and they should provide more information on what the programs are about and why they are needed, because i think generally people think we do need to have some secrecy, but we need to know also what kinds of things are being done, what sort of rights do we have as

citizens. and i think that conversation is an important one and not one that the white house or the congress wanted to get into. >> let me open this up to the students at the washington center. if there is one russian there, introduce yourself and ask a brief question. question there, introduce yourself and ask a brief question. no questions. we will go to purdue university. final questions? >> any of us are familiar with chris the things that are portrayed in the west wing and in political dramas. is there a side that does not come through on those dramas in real life, and if so, can you talk about that question mark -- ? >> sure. one of the things that is happened, if you look at the briefing, you assume that is the kind of relationship that people have, that reporters have with officials. you can relate, you see the television correspondents in

positions where they are telling truth to power. they want the public to see how tough they are as questioners. alternately, in the clinton administration and then in the early bush administration, there used to be gaggles, and marlon fitzwater had them as well. a gaggle was a social in the press secretary's office at about 9:15 and 9:30, and the them,that struck me about there were a few that were held in this administration, is how productive they are. it may be 15 minutes, and you get 18 questions. you might have 15 people called on, whereas in a briefing today, that jay carney is doing, you're lucky if he gets 15 people in in -- in an hour and

10 minutes, and the answer was -- the questions are short. they do not do it in a hostile and the manner. i think gaggles are very effective, and i think generally the relationship between reporters and officials is more productive and less hostile than you would think in watching debriefings. >> that we put one other example on the table before we conclude, cause humor is the best technique is the best for any aesident, and obama had question three years into his presidency if he was a legal .esident they also released his birth record in hawaii. let's watch for april of 2011 how barack obama dealt with this lingering issue. [video clip] >> as some of you have heard

from of the state of hawaii released i official longform birth certificate. [cheers] ultimately, it puts all doubts to rest. but just in case there are any ingering questions, tonight am prepared to go a step further. [laughter] tonight for the first time i am releasing my official birth video. [laughter] [applause] warn you -- [laughter] this footage in 50 years, not even me. but let's take a look.

[beeps] ♪ [applause] >> why did this work? his voice goes over very well, and i think in that setting, whether it is the gridiron or correspondents association, that reporters and the president are happy to be in

a setting where each can make fun of himself and herself. and presidents tend to have particular individuals that they get to do humor. and i know this. i went through a bunch of speeches that reagan had given at the correspondents association dinner, and i know that they were all written by the same person who was i think still quite active, and that is land anon parvin. he writes speeches for republicans, and he is still very funny. these materials about all this messaging, where should it go? >> it is useful to get a sense of what a president is about, what he does.

if you want to get down to primary materials, you look at a president's diary and see what he does. do something like look at a press conference a must see the prince shall -- the press conference if you can get a video, and that the preparation he went through to get there. get a sense of who the president is. through -- also, one of the things i do is i go through on by month forh -- each president, reagan to ford, and look at all the different things they have done that month and places they have gone, speeches that they have given, and try to find some of the speeches that are core to them. obama gave a speech which i think was a real core speech in april of 2009, in which he talked about the five pillars of his administration, that we were going to be living with --

economic policy, like health , dealing with the deficit -- they were were all things that he was focused on. but every now and then, like in a state of the new message, he comes back to that. that theyorm a theme have not consistently used. but the thing that goes to the administration. >> the white house to medications operations, the book titled "managing the president's kumar.," with martha fromfascinating insights students at george mason, purdue university, and the washington center. also i will university. thank you very much. >> my pleasure. . .