|
Inauguration: Around Town
With Marc Fisher
Post Metro Columnist
Saturday, Jan. 20, 2001; 4 p.m. EST
Washington Post Metro columnist Marc Fisher opens up his
second special show today to talk about what's going on in a town that's jam-packed this inaugural weekend. He's been milling around the crowds at the inaugural parade and keeping tabs on what the protesters are doing, and first checked in at 1:30 p.m. EST.
Fisher was online Saturday, Jan. 20, at 4 p.m. EST to talk about what's happening on the streets of Washington this historic day.
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Marc Fisher: Welcome, inauguration fans. Today has turned out to be a recreation of one of those 19th century daguerrotypes of muddy, grey, cold, wet Washington, complete with the dour-faced officials and the masses huddled against the grim weather. The only thing we were missing was the top hats.
This, thanks to some uncertain mix of the elements and the awkward election, has been an inaugural of sparse crowds and cautious behavior. The new president got out of his car, but only on the safe terrain of the final block of the parade. A relatively small number of protesters managed to halt the parade as overcautious security agencies tried to calculate the potential impact of a thrown Coke can on the new ultra-secure presidential limo.
But enough of that. Let's hear what's on your minds...
Washington, DC:
Was it safer as they approached the reviewing stand and is that why the Bushes got out?
Marc Fisher: Nothing official yet, but that appears to be the case. Bush did as his father had back in '89, walking only the last, safest block. Things started looking a tad dicey back at 13th Street, where demonstrators had managed to commandeer a considerable portion of the bleachers. The parade froze up for a solid five minutes, apparently because of the potential threat from the protesters. But once the motorcade got moving again, there were no outbursts, nothing thrown.
Arlington, VA:
Are the protestors a force to be reckoned with today?
Marc Fisher: They've posed a challenge to police at various spots, mostly on the outskirts of the parade route. The anarchists among the protesters came to rumble and they got their wish here and there. But most of the protesters came merely to make their statement and show their signs, and there was little trouble where they spoke out.
Washington, DC:
What is your estimate of the number of protesters and were they blocked from Bush's view on Pennsylvania Avenue?
Marc Fisher: Numbers are always tricky, and I hardly covered the whole territory, but judging from what our reporters are saying, it's clear that there were several thousand protesters assembled at a dozen or more locations. And no, they were smack in Bush's view, holding prime seating at a key point in the parade. Police weren't happy about this, seeing as how those seats had been reserved for Bush supporters. But the Bush followers have been very lax about actually attending inaugural events all week, so there were plenty of empty seats all along the route. Maybe Republicans prefer to watch on TV.
Tyler, Texas:
Mr. Fisher: Many press and "insider"
reports indicate that George W. Bush
wants to run the government as a CEO or
chairman of the board who delegates
extensively. When Ronald Reagan tried
this approach we ended up with the
Iran-Contra scandal and the S&L
debacle. Do you see the same dangers
for the new president? Thanks for the
reply.
Marc Fisher: The executive approach has advantages and disadvantages. If he surrounds himself with sharp people who are interested in something more than edging their way to the top of some political heap, then it can work. Reagan had both success and failure with that model. The other extreme, in which a president attempts to handle the daily management of the government, also has major drawbacks--witness how Carter, and to a lesser extent, Clinton were overwhelmed by their own appetites for detail work.
Most of the best scholars of the presidency advocate an executive approach that's backed by a strong command of the rhetorical powers of the office; some scholars have held up Eisenhower as a prime example of how that can work.
Palmyra, VA:
Not a question, just a comment.
A really Bush league inauguration. Sleazy and overdone.
Marc Fisher: You want overdone? Go take a look at Reagan's show. This pales next to that. The sleaze quotient is pretty steady in recent history--private money fuels this whole week of events. But I don't see where this one is any worse than the previous few.
Washington DC:
What do you think of Bush's address?
Marc Fisher: The speech was refreshing in its simplicity and clarity, though light on policy and vision. It was classic Bush Family Values in its emphasis on civility and compassion--that prep school background is never far from the surface. And it was surprisingly Clintonian in its reach--leave no child behind, big emphasis on education (an area in which the federal govt play hardly any role), and lip service toward society's least. Whether any meat will be found on these bones remains to be seen.
Arlington VA:
Were there more protestors today than at any previous inauguration?
Marc Fisher: I couldn't say definitively, but there was certainly a greater presence of protests than we ordinarily see at these events. For the parade to have halted as it did was a victory for the protesters probably beyond their hopes.
Alexandria, Virginia:
Dear Mr. Fisher,
We live in a free country. One can say virtually whatever one wants to. However, I thought Rev. Graham's invocation of Christ at the end of his otherwise fine invocation was rather insensitive. Right off the bat it seemed to belie President Bush's call for greater inclusiveness in America today.
For some it seems so vitally important to make sure certain values are offered singularly in Christ's name, or Mohammad's name, or Moses's name, etc. But what we say in whomever's name is really what's most important. Our actions speak more about our values than in whose name we say we hold them. I just thought it was unnecessary. I even thought I saw Bush grimace a bit when it was said. But perhaps this was wishful thinking. I guess having Graham get Christ's name in there somehow sanctifies the inauguration for folks like the Moral Majority and others who just can't bring themselves to acknowledge that America just might be able to uphold high ideals and values even if it isn't always done specifically in Christ's name. What do you think Mr. Fisher. I bet most of the coverage won't dare to tread on this issue, prefering to focus more on Mr. Bush's speech and other events. I noticed that the Post's coverage so far on the website has no reference to the invocation at all.
Marc Fisher: We had a discussion about this on my earlier show today and other folks also found the Christian references in both the invocation and the benediction to be less than inclusive.
But that's the way of the Hill, where chaplains routinely offer Christian prayer without even a nod toward the country's religious minorities.
Franklin Graham's invocation was in no way dissimilar from the many his father Billy has given over the decades, and I wouldn't have expected that tradition to change. Though you are right that it seemed out of keeping with the repeated references to inclusiveness in Bush's speech.
Washington, DC:
You're my favorite Post columnist and I appreciate your responses. Do you know anything about Laura Bush's political views vis-a-vis her husband's?
Marc Fisher: Thanks for the compliment. Laura Bush has always tried to remain out of the political arena, at least publicly, but just a couple of days ago, she went on TV and made a clear statement that she does not want to see Roe v Wade overturned--a direct contradiction of her husband's position against abortion. Of course, Barbara Bush before her had the same difference with her president-husband.
Germantown,MD:
One of the few of your columns that I agreed with was regarding the new statue at the FDR memorial. What has been the reaction to this seemingly "non-PC" opinion ?
Marc Fisher: I was surprised to find an overwhelmingly positive reaction to that column, in which I criticized the new statue of FDR in a wheelchair as ahistorical, out of keeping with the intent of that great memorial, and a sop to a narrow-minded interest group. Of more than 400 emails I received, well more than two-thirds were supportive of my view, including almost all of the missives from disabled people.
Washington, DC:
What's your reporters' estimate of the crowd for the parade today and how does that compare to the last few inaugural parades? If it's smaller, is it the weather or Bush, do you think?
Marc Fisher: I haven't seen any attempt to put numbers on the crowds today, but it's clearly lighter than usual--in many places, much lighter. Lacking any evidence to the contrary, I'd put the blame on the weather. But it is worth noting that the low attendance has been a constant throughout the week--Mrs. Bush's literary gathering at Constitution Hall filled fewer than half the seats. A similar proportion of unoccupied seats marred the youth concert at MCI Center Friday night. Maybe the Republicans are saving their energies for the balls tonight.
Alexandria, Va:
A haiku my mom wrote in Dec. after the Supreme Court decision:
The nine have spoken
Four years of "Hail to the Thief"
Bush is in, who won?
Watching this parade is fairly depressing. I do wish I didn't enjoy being employed so much (yes I have the joy of working on Saturdays) or else I would have loved to have been down there with the protesters. Of course, I would somehow have to distance myself from the ones screaming obscenities. Don't they realize that kind of takes away from the original message? Argh.
Marc Fisher: You would think that the non violent protesters would make more of an effort to dissociate themselves from the anarchists whose main aim is to mix it up with the cops and declare themselves righteous.
Lincoln, NE:
A cold, cloudy, muddy, grey day, you say?
Hmm..that could cast a cloud over the legitimacy of his Presidency.
Ok...ok...I said it. You can string me up by the thumbnails now.
Seriously, Bush says he wants to reach out to Democrats but then he nominates a polarizing
figure like John Ashcroft.
Bush says he wants to help the enviroment but then overturns (according to the Post) an order from Clinton that restricts animal feed runoff.
Bush says he wants to reach out to minorities
but his supporters leak out a sordid story about Jesse Jackson.
Are we going to have a President that does the opposite of what he says?
Thank you.
Marc Fisher: Hard to say (by the way, I've seen no evidence and not even any suggestion that Bush or anyone around him had anything to do with the Jackson story.) But it's not clear what this administration will be--the moderate, inclusive one that the president promises, or a crabbier, narrower one indicated by the more notorious of his Cabinet choices. A lot of that will likely depend on just how involved Bush is in setting and pushing a policy agenda, rather than letting his colleagues in Congress and the Executive Branch make their own way.
Marc Fisher: Well, that's about all we have time for this session. Thanks for checking in both now and earlier today. I'll be back in the paper Tuesday and I'll be back online Thursday with the regular edition of Potomac Confidential.
Pray for lots of snow.
Automatically Update Page
|
Get New Responses
|
Submit Question
© Copyright 2001 The Washington Post Company | 
