Bush's Last White House Correspondents' Dinner Promises Surprises, But No 'New York Times'

[EV_Ares]

By Joe Strupp

Published: April 25, 2008 12:58 PM ET

NEW YORK So what will President George W. Bush do for his final White House Correspondents' Association dinner on Saturday? Rumors are flying and speculation is growing as the president's last chance to get back at the White House press corps nears. Missing, in any case, will be The New York Times, which bought two tables last year and counted among its guests Karl Rove. Times officials have said they will no longer take part in the dinner, citing the uncomfortable pairing of journalists with those they cover. "These events can create a false perception that reporters and their sources are pals, and that perception could cloud our credibility," Spokeswoman Diane McNulty wrote. "It's not worth it."

White House Spokesman Tony Fratto offered few hints about the Bush farewell appearance, noting, "I can't say; state secret." But, he added, "it's not like the State of the Union." Landon Parvin, a longtime Republican speechwriter who has helped Bush with all seven previous WHCA dinner speeches, also offered few details, saying earlier this week: "We still have a couple of options."

Bush has been known to use the chance at each dinner to both make fun of himself and the press, giving up the podium in 2005 to wife, Laura, who used it for a memorable roast of her husband. In 2006, he invited Bush impersonator Steve Bridges to share the stage and essentially offer a "dueling banjos" approach to speechifying. "He has a great sense of humor and, on the podium and off the podium, has impeccable timing," Fratto said. Parvin, who is credited with both the Laura Bush speech and the impersonator approach, also wrote one of the more controversial Bush dinner acts, his "comical" slide show at the 2004 Radio and Television Correspondents Dinner about looking for weapons of mass destruction.

Last year, with the Virginia Tech shooting still fresh in many peoples' minds, Bush declined to offer a joke-filled talk at the WHCA event. Both Fratto and Parvin have said some zingers meant for last year could still be used. "It will be a mix of serious and some good material left over from last year," Fratto said. A new WHCA Web site, launched earlier this year at www.whca.net, offers clips of past dinners dating back to the early 1990s. It also includes the official menu for this year's dinner, which boasts berber spiced petite filet, Tunisian tabil seared salmon, and white chocolate mousse. CBS late-night talk show host Craig Ferguson is set to entertain Bush and the guests. The list of expected big names does not appear to include any controversial or awkward choices that have come to be common in recent years.

Some around D.C. had speculated that Eliot Spitzer prostitute Ashley Alexandra Dupre, who had met the disgraced governor at the nearby Mayflower Hotel under the name Kristen, would be a perfect guest. But no such luck. Among the big names expected for this year's dinner are Ben Affleck, Pamela Anderson, Ken Burns, John Cusack, Katie Couric, Jesse Jackson, Rob Lowe, Salman Rushdie, Tim Daly, and for the tween set, The Jonas Brothers. Sen. John McCain is slated to attend with both his wife, Cindy, and 96-year-old mother, Roberta. Former Congressman Charlie Wilson, of "Charlie Wilson's War" fame, is also on the list.

Absent will be Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama, both of whom are still on the campaign trail.

C-SPAN is set to cover the event beginning at 8 p.m.

Link: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003794676

[guyanakoolaid]

1. No Stephen Colbert?

THAT would be a surprise. Bush having to balls to face Colbert again

[nilram]

7. I found it interesting that

even the article didn't mention anything about Colbert when it referenced "controversial" skits. The press corps didn't like being made fun of any more than el presidente.

[ColbertWatcher]

8. We'll always have 2006!

[Laurier]

9. Yes! That was priceless.

Hard to top that one.

[ColbertWatcher]

10. I forgot one...

...here Stephen is saying "hello" to Antonin Scalia...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

2. I find this revolting. This man should be shunned.

[SpiralHawk]

3. Get 'back' at the White House press corp?

What the hell for? Smearing lipstick all over his butt while they kissed it for 8 years?

[EV_Ares]

4. I guess David Gregory won't be dancing with Karl Rove this year, eom.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

5. Whatever is planned

will be an embarrassing bore.

[HighNoon]

6. Pres Bush - favorite movie? High Noon

INSIDE HIGH NOON DOCUMENTARY with Pres Clinton

HIGH NOON was hailed upon its release in 1952 as an instant classic. It won several Academy Awards, including one for its legendary star, Gary Cooper. It was named the year's best picture by the New York Film Critics Society. And yet, even though it's high on the American Film Institute's 100 Best Films of the Century, HIGH NOON's respect has been hard won, indeed. Perhaps no other classic film has had such a rocky road as this "simple little western."

Decried by influential auteurist critics and academics, HIGH NOON has been attacked for being untrue to the western genre - read anti-populist; for being "middle-brow" (whatever that might mean); for being social drama hiding behind the western genre - and muddled social drama, at that; for being the most un-American film ever made (courtesy of John Wayne), etc.

However, 56 years after its release, HIGH NOON still powerfully resonates with audiences around the world. When Solidarity needed a universal image to promote democracy and the right to vote in Poland in 1987, they chose Gary Cooper in HIGH NOON, a ballot in his hand rather than a gun. Conservatives and liberals both manage to cite HIGH NOON on the floor of Congress as a metaphor for their competing political ideals. Political cartoonists and headline writers inevitably use HIGH NOON as reference for countless crises. President Eisenhower cited High Noon as his favorite film, as have President Clinton and former Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizuma.

On one hand, HIGH NOON has been attacked for being a conservative, damaging portrait of arrogant male paternalism. On the other hand, HIGH NOON is praised for challenging entrenched notions of gender, for exploring masculine anxiety, masculinity as a construct. Feminist critics and academics are offering intriguing and complex new readings to HIGH NOON.

Example: Amy Fowler (Grace Kelly) is having her new husband, Marshall Will Kane (Cooper), quit his career, leave his town, leave his friends, marry outside his church, and open a store of her choosing (wearing, perhaps, an apron?). Does Will Kane take on the villains at noon as a final gasp of masculine protest, as a declaration of independence from his wife's control?

Ernest Hemingway compared a story's meaning to an iceberg - like the iceberg, 7/8th of which lies hidden beneath the surface, 7/8th of a story's meaning lies beneath the surface.

Carl Foreman's bare-to-the-bones script and Fred Zinnemann's equally spare direction are a perfect film correlative to Hemingway's iceberg theory. This taut, seemingly straightforward little suspense western is complex, multi-layered, and perhaps even more relevant today than when it opened 56 years ago.

http://www.myspace.com/insidehighnoon