CBS's John Roberts asked what message Secretary of State Colin Powell will deliver during his trip to the Middle East when it comes to sanctions against Iraq, ones "that matter, sanctions that are effective on the regime, but do not carry with them the same level of criticism that current sanctions have had in that they affect the Iraqi civilian population more than they do the regime."

On this, Bush seems to think it is good enough to show some understanding of the question -- in this case, identifying the right part of the world. His administration was "reviewing all policy in all regions of the world," he said. "And one of the areas we've been spending a lot of time on is the Persian Gulf and the Middle East. The secretary of state is going to go listen to our allies as to how best to effect a policy, the primary goal of which will be to say to Saddam Hussein, 'We won't tolerate you developing weapons of mass destruction and we expect you to leave your neighbors alone.'

"I have said that the sanction regime is like Swiss cheese," Bush said with a smile. "That meant that they weren't very effective. And we're going to review current sanction policy, and review options as to how to make the sanctions work." Then Bush went back to the talking points he'd been given the week before when he authorized a bombing mission against Iraq, one that his spokesman Ari Fleischer told the Washington Post was "supported by all but the most partisan Americans."

Roberts asked a follow-up question about sanctions, since Bush hadn't answered his question. "How would you characterize sanctions that work, sir?"

"Sanctions that work are sanctions that, when a -- the collective will of the region supports the policy, that we have a coalition of countries that agree with the policy set out by the United States. To me, that's the most effective form of sanctions. Many nations in that part of the world aren't adhering to the sanction policy that had been in place, and as a result, a lot of goods are heading into Iraq that were not supposed to," the president said. "And so, good sanction policy is one where the United States is able to build a coalition around the strategy."

Whatever one's opinion about sanctions against Iraq, which Bush just inherited, questions about the effectiveness of the sanctions require a response that's a little deeper than that.

"You've shown a lot of interest in Latin America issues," said another reporter.

"Si," said Bush, before saying that he was "concerned about the amount of acreage in cultivation for the growth of cocoa leaves." That was helpfully cleaned up for the official transcript to be "coca leaves." Cocoa is the powder from which chocolate is made; cocaine comes from coca.

This went on. It was not a total disaster, nothing truly horrifying, but it was disconcerting. Bush is lucky that so many softballs came his way -- including no fewer than three questions in which he was practically begged to take a shot at Bill Clinton's sleazy pardon auction.

No questions about the fact that Christian conservatives are questioning Bush's faith-based initiative program; no questions about Republican senators like Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Jim Jeffords of Vermont, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island -- all of whom have expressed concern about the fiscal responsibility of Bush's tax proposal.

And not a single question about how Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Bush's Senate liaison, was trying to shut Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., out of negotiations on the patients rights bill that bears McCain's name.

I mean, why would any reporter ask: "Given the questions that are being raised about the involvement of Sen. Hillary Clinton's brother in the pardons process, what kind of guidance would you give members of your own politically active family in not only seeking pardons but seeking any other influence on any other issues with your administration?" Especially after President Bush had already twice begged off taking a shot at Clinton on this issue? What was the point?