i don't know which is scarier ... the administration or some who are posting here.

the administration seems to feel it doesn't have to answer the tough questions.

many of the posters here seem to agree with that sentiment!

to those who don't think government should be held accountable to the press i have but two words:

"joseph mccarthy"

Great work as usual. I really admire and respect your tenancity. You ask the tough questions even though you rarely, if ever, get an honest response.

The question I am dying to know the answer to is in regards to stem cell research. If it is murder to use those embryos for research, how is it not murder to throw them in the trash or discard them? No one has asked that or if they have, I haven't heard the response.

I realize the Middle East crisis is important, but so are saving the lives of millions of Americans living with diseases such as ALS and MS. Why don't we help those here?

You don't want to know the answer to that question because you've already formed it. What kind of a pathetic question is that? You assume your answer before you even give the President time to answer. Is it really considered good journalism to throw around loaded questions and then pretend that you would "really like to know." Get a better act. You've been asking the same question over and over again, and really, the idea that the media maintains any objectivity over these issues is long gone. Keep watching the ratings tank with this same act, if you please.

Mr. Gregory, your questions would have been great, but I doubt that Mr. Bush would have answered you without a preauthorized script from Dick Cheney. And just because the Iraqi PM didn't condemn Hezbollah doesn't mean he questions Israel's right to exist. Take a look at the pictures on the Newsweek site regarding the bombing of Lebanon. Then tell me why the PM didn't mention Hezbollah. Israel has a right to defend herself always, but an overeaction is an overeaction.

Are you actually going to imply that Hamas and Hezbollah were created by Pres. Bush? Everybody who has had the pleasure of hearing you ask one of your very intellectual questions will agree this one pretty much is the most intelligent. You are truly a funny guy, in a real narcissistic way.

I agree that more questions need to be asked of the White House. I also agree with many of the other comments that we all know it will never happen. David, I'd like NBC to be asking these questions (just like you did in your blog entry)to the American people. Maybe if more Americans heard your questions, they would realize that there have been no answers from the White House. This process might get some to at least "think about" how this administration has fed us nothing but lies and deceit. Maybe, just maybe, Americans would take notice and vote this republican controlled, corrupt congress out of office. It's just too bad America was asleep during the last presidential election, look where all those misguided republican votes have taken us...

why does everyone seem to think we need "fair and balanced" reporting? We don't get it from the crazies at FOX, even though they claim they don't spin the stories. If the reporters, or "anaylists" aren't spinning the news in Bush's favor, what do you call their constant attacks on any and every person critical of this administration? If the complaint is too much media attention to negative news, why doesn't FOX devote itself full time to reporting the positive? That way, the network would only need to broadcast about fifteen minutes a day!

I recently read an article that the people of Kuwait were getting some type of rebate check from the government because of excess assets.The number was something like $690 million. Since we bailed them out during the first Gulf war, what are they doing now? Are they helping with anything or are they also getting rich off of the oil we buy?

"I sure would like to know the answer to that question."

OK, here's the straight answer, one that no public official would give you: "That's a stupid question that shows more about your own impatience, bias and ignorance than it does about US policy to date."

Please, David, spare us the hindsight and short-sight that pass for the media's political analysis these days. Sure, half of America would love to see you whine like a six-year-old on the car ride to Six Flags ("Arewethereyet? Arewethereyet? Arewethereyet? Whyaren'twethereyet?").

Sure, Iraq isn't stable now, like it was under Saddam -- with 6,000 children dying per month (according to the World Health Organization) and 20 million living under brutal oppression. But we're aiming for something better, stronger, and more lasting than dictatorship and death, David. It will take time to get there, and it will take a strong political will to ignore the whinging impatience of those who only crave a shocking headline for today.

I thank the fates that there wasn't a 24-hour news cycle during World War II -- imagine the second-guessing the media could've done regarding D-Day, Midway, Bataan, etc.

And to blame the nukes of Iran and the existance of Hamas and Hizbollah on OUR policies is as silly and fictional as it is arrogant, but hey, that's already been covered above.

David,

I think even better questions could and should be asked of others who aren't such earnest puppets. Cheney would be at the top of my list. So would Rove. Their policies for the most part are not leading to success but interestingly they still control the game even if everyone loses. They who control the conversation keep the rest of us within their game. By creating the Iraq war they dominate the conversation such that we are distracted. Those of us on the sidelines can't even get a hearing on even more urgent matters than Iraq and the Middle East. In addition, we are out of the conversation that should be taking place concerning the Middle East, namely Shiite Sunni divisions throughout, Islamic fundamentalism in general, and our ridiculous funding of this "war on terror" on both sides through our purchase of oil (and our borrowing for our side from our kids and the Chinese). In two years or so these charlatans will be back to their well-funded incestuous think-tanks and become well-paid talking heads on Fox News. Meanwhile the Earth will be heating up as we dump millions of years of accumulated carbon that we purchased from autocratic despots... oh the absurdity of it all.

David,

If you shouldn't ask the President a question that might embarrass him, what could you possibly ask him? How are Laura and the kids?

David,
The "sheep" always point to the questioning Bush and his INVASION of Iraq to be a Democrat/Liberal ideal. Well, folks, it's not...it is called intelligence. Those who question, have it, those who are sheep, don't.
Not surprisingly, many of the "negative" comments all have the a bit of "Animal Farm" feel to them. A bunch of little sheep following the Supreme "PIG" commander. I especially love the comment "Saying the actions of Bush produced Hamas and Hezbollah is irresponsible and dangerous." Oh, and invading a sovereign nation, lying, spying on and screwing the American people, using Christianity to sell your incomprehensible policies...isn't irresponsible and dangerous? Get a fricken' life.

I think that it is interesting that your questions presume failure and dishonesty as their basis. As P.W. points out, the administration does not answer your questions. I wouldn't answer questions from such a biased position either. A little bit of objectivity and/or a lack of agenda might get you more information.

Congratulations and do it again, please.

You think its the men and women of the armed forces that are changing things over in Iraq? Think again. It's guys like David Gregory, fresh from the Whitehouse lawn, that are really making an impact. Who cares if you never got a chance to ask your question, its making people aware of your sheer brilliance that's really important. I'd like to shake your hand when you're done patting yourself on the back.

David, It would be nice if the press somehow could get together and asked the two questions that you posed or at least get a consensus of what is deemed important and then push for the answer -- Bush is accountable to the American public.
The lady from Shelton obviously feels that sex with an intern is as important as 2800 dead young Americans who had their whole lives before them, the growing deficit and our standing in world; not to mention the innocent lives of the Iraqi. I don't understand that concept.
Bush administration politics have made the terrorist throughout the world stronger and defiant because we are too bogged down in the muck to do anything meaningful and/or to admit to our mistakes.
Not only did Bush outsource hunting down Osama; now they have dropped it entirely?? Do I feel less safe; yes!! Do I hold this administration responsible; yes!! Can we get out and save face?? someone wiser and more humaritarian will be left with the pieces.
The press has the right to ask questions and the president should be giving them answers and not rhetoric.

My only response to his query is where were all of you journalists in 2000 and 2001 and 2002 and not asking any tough questions. Where were these Congressmen who are blasting him now who were so gleeful to undo anything Clinton and just fed into the power grab of this administration. Shame on all of us for being silent for so long.

David Gregory:

Why do you keep expecting answers from the Bush Administration? Haven't you learned by now that you will a)get ignored or b) be told a lie or c)will have your name dragged through the mud for being "unpatriotic". Only in this administration is free speech not allowed.

Maybe you will be less disappointed if you stop expecting anything from the WH. I agree with you whole heartedly, but for pete's sake, stop wasting your breath and time expecting an answer from them.

Good questions, Mr. Gregory. But they presume that Mr. Bush's public statements regarding why the war was started were the real reasons for it. And politicians, like lawyers, are lying whenever their lips are moving.

I would suggest that a review of all the evidence shows that the war had nothing to do with making the Middle East more stable, unless taking out one of Israel's enemies is counted toward that goal.

The war on Iraq was launched for three major reasons: 1) the holdovers from Bush I (Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.) were angry that Saddam was still in power and wanted him eliminated as a potential threat, 2) the pro-Israel lobby (Kristol, Wolfowitz, Feith, etc.) wanted Saddam's threat to Israel eliminated, and 3) George W. Bush had a personal hatred for Saddam because of the threat to the elder Bush's life in Kuwait after Gulf War I (he has been quoted as saying something to the effect of "he tried to kill my daddy" to various people. There was also the desire to control the oil supply, base US troops somewhere other than Saudi, etc. but those are minor reasons.

The Bush adminstration took power convinced that the main foreign policy problems in the world they needed to deal with were Iraq (despite the fact that the Gulf War and UN sanctions had disarmed Saddam's regime) and missile defense. It's why they ignored the warnings in the Summer of 2001 about al Qaeda's intent to attack America. They were itching to go to war with Iraq from day 1; 9/11 gave them the cover they needed to sell it to the public.

Keep up the good work sir, and ignore the goose-steppers hyponitized by Fox.

Lest you all forget Adolf Hitler was elected by the fledging Weimar democracy and later made chancellor by Von Pappen. He garnered only 32% of the vote and later hijacked the country. Anyone see the similarities with Hamas and Hezbolla.

There are too many comments and it is unlikely that this will even be read. However, I feel that it is worth at least a try.

This is no longer about right vs. left viewpoints. Simply put, too many have died; too much has been sacrificed, for too little gain and too many lies.

Those who claim that this will bring stability have failed to take note of history. Nation building takes decades, generally requires shared, common goals and, only seems to be successful where there is a lack of strong and countering political challenge (isn’t history a wonderful thing).

Iraq is the exact opposite. We don’t have decades, the only common goal seems to be the desire to kill Americans and, there is an abundance of strong, countering political factions. In fact, a better characterization of Iraq might be: A large collection of well armed factions all of which are at some level of conflict with each other and the USA. Note that I have left the lack of clarity of America’s goals for the region to the imagination of the reader (no, promoting democracy is not a clear goal).

As far as everyone believing that Iraq had WMDs. Nice try but wrong. Please review what the actual inspectors had said in conjunction with the released intelligence from numerous countries. Hell, for that matter, just inspect OUR intelligence from that time that was conveniently ignored. An obvious question here would be, “if you think that Iraq was such a necessary move, why do you feel the need to re-write history.”

Additionally, Iraq was one of the single most useful states in that area to us. We had a long history of successfully playing Iraq’s aggressiveness against Iran’s fundamentalism. It was an extremely successful strategy. Yes, there were problems (he did invade Kuwait), but even there that proved to be politically beneficial. Pushing back his invasion forced many of the more moderate states right into our camp. By taking Iraq out, we have eliminated one of the reasons for the moderate states to be allied with us. All in all, this situation had many similarities to our cold war which we won through a mix of economics and smart politics (I would hazard the “smart” politics was too much for this administration).

As far as “handling the situation”, there is NO handling the situation. Multiple big players (America, Iran, now Russia, possibly China, etc.) influencing multiple well-armed, well-trained factions built upon ideologies and hatreds 100s if not 1000 years old onto of a valuable commodity in a strategically important part of the world. OMG, at least grow up and realize that there are some situations that you can’t just “handle” and this is one of them.

Finally, leadership understands the long term implication of its actions (try reading Sun Tzu before commenting). The money, lives, forces that we have spent there are not available to be spent elsewhere. Why are other nations ignoring us if not out right flaunting our impoverished influence (can we say N. Korea)? Because we have spent our political capital and are virtually powerless to act against them.

I guess my major point that I really wanted to make was that Iraq is nothing other than a major F*** up. Those who claim differently are the same ones who will willingly swallow the kool-aid. Too much has been lost on Iraq and we need to solve this problem. The first step is to stop w/ the BS about Iraq, admit the real problems and try to figure out a solution. However, I must admit that after reading the comments, I doubt that this will be done

Dear Mr. Gregory,
I think your questions would have been great and would have at least caused the President to once again consider the idea of accountiblity in his policies. It saddens me that we have "progressed" to a point where our leaders dont seem to care what they do or how they do it. The fall back on the phrase "trust me", and yet I can't think of a time when I have had so little trust in our government. Please keep asking the hard questions and lets expect answers! its the only way we can regain what this administration has taken from us.

I wish we had more journalists like David Gregory.
For those who think the only choices are CNN and FOX, there are some independent news shows that give other perspectives. I especially recommend Democracy Now! on radio and tv. You can find many other sources by googling 'alternative news'.

C'mon - give Dave a break. Without questions like these he wouldn't be invited back on Imus.

David, Do us all a favor. Continue to ask the tough questions that need to be answered. We, the people of the United States, need to hear the truth. You seem to be one of the few reporters that has enough grit and guts to call this administration to the carpet on its handling of all issues concerning our country. Thanks!