The Blame Game

[sgtmac_46]

Look for my post about the President's trip to Iraq; Thanksgiving two years ago.

Now it's your turn ...

Are 8 trips to the stricken area, (how many visits to the Astrodome?) over-doing it a bit?

Is there anything this President does that you can recognize as politically movtivated ... and not good for the country?

How long did it take those eight heavy-lift helicopters to get to Pakistan?

Ok, he didn't visit enough or too much? Make up our minds.

 

[Tgace]

Both! :idunno:

 

[heretic888]

Ok, he didn't visit enough or too much? Make up our minds.

I think Michael is trying to say, in essence, that:

"Too little, too late".

Laterz.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Sure looks like he's trying to salvage his administration's reputation. I wonder if FEMA is helping him do that? Polls would indicate they are, given how low he's sunk.


Regards,


Steve

 

[sgtmac_46]

I think Michael is trying to say, in essence, that:

"Too little, too late".

Laterz.

I know what Michael's trying to say, but it's coming off sounding petty.

 

[michaeledward]

What I am trying to say is that it would be perfectly acceptable for the President to visit the affected areas if he was doing anything other than staging photo ops.

Actually, what I heard him say on today's morning interview was contrite, thoughtful and appropriate; finally. I think Laura must have coached him last night. Hell, he almost sounded genuine.

But, as one other person put it ... "can't we just say that President Bush has had his 'Bullhorn Moment' for Katrina and move on." I mean, it would be nice if one, just one of his photo-ops was not so contrived and controlled. Maybe meet with someone who's home now consists of a foundation ... I mean, other than Trent Lott.

As far as I am concerned ... he could visit the affected Gulf Coast one hundred times .... if each of those visits consisted of meeting with Governors, Soldiers and Firefighters ... the visit is worthless.

I'm would like to see the report on who from Habitat for Humanity was actually at this mornings build site. I'm betting on bussed in National Guard soldiers.

Can't he just drum up another imminent terrorist threat to boost his dumper polls?

Tritefully yours,

Mike

 

[sgtmac_46]

What I am trying to say is that it would be perfectly acceptable for the President to visit the affected areas if he was doing anything other than staging photo ops.

Actually, what I heard him say on today's morning interview was contrite, thoughtful and appropriate; finally. I think Laura must have coached him last night. Hell, he almost sounded genuine.

But, as one other person put it ... "can't we just say that President Bush has had his 'Bullhorn Moment' for Katrina and move on." I mean, it would be nice if one, just one of his photo-ops was not so contrived and controlled. Maybe meet with someone who's home now consists of a foundation ... I mean, other than Trent Lott.

As far as I am concerned ... he could visit the affected Gulf Coast one hundred times .... if each of those visits consisted of meeting with Governors, Soldiers and Firefighters ... the visit is worthless.

I'm would like to see the report on who from Habitat for Humanity was actually at this mornings build site. I'm betting on bussed in National Guard soldiers.

Can't he just drum up another imminent terrorist threat to boost his dumper polls?

Tritefully yours,

Mike

See, if we're pointing fingers at Bush for contrived photo-ops, that's a little trite. He's a politician, and as contrived photo-ops go he's certainly not anywhere near the worst or most shameless. Pointing out that they purposely put themselves in front of a running camera gets the "Duh" award of the year. They're politicians, it's what they do. Bush would have to get up pretty early in the morning to match the ham-handed theatrics of a Ted Kennedy or a Hillary Clinton. How many times did I hear "Reporting for Duty" and "Hope is on the way" before the election? It's all shameless pandering, every bit of it.

 

[arnisador]

Eight trips is just showing off, in my opinion.

 

[michaeledward]

How many times did I hear "Reporting for Duty" and "Hope is on the way" before the election? It's all shameless pandering, every bit of it.

I'll see you're "Reporting for Duty" and "Hope is on the way", and raise you to "Credible Threat of Terrorist Attack" and "We've Killed Al Qaeda's Number 2".


And some politicians actually work on making peoples lives better. If you can't see that in the work of Kennedy and Clinton, then perhaps you can see it in John McCain. In a stunning act of Political Numbskullery, President Bush has threatened to veto a bill that would codify as United States Law, the current rules of the United States Military concerning treatment of prisoners.

Think about it ... the Commander-in-Chief is going to veto a law that is current military policy. And it has been the Military's policy for decades. Huh?

 

[sgtmac_46]

I'll see you're "Reporting for Duty" and "Hope is on the way", and raise you to "Credible Threat of Terrorist Attack" and "We've Killed Al Qaeda's Number 2".


And some politicians actually work on making peoples lives better. If you can't see that in the work of Kennedy and Clinton, then perhaps you can see it in John McCain. In a stunning act of Political Numbskullery, President Bush has threatened to veto a bill that would codify as United States Law, the current rules of the United States Military concerning treatment of prisoners.

Think about it ... the Commander-in-Chief is going to veto a law that is current military policy. And it has been the Military's policy for decades. Huh?

Of course if it's already US Military policy, (See also: Punishable by the Uniform Code of Military Justice) why does it need to be US civilian law? Exactly what purpose is that supposed to serve.

Seems redundant. Perhaps Bush see's it as nothing more than a veiled attempt to take legal jurisdiction from Military courts, and place it in civilian courts. I'll defer to the UCMJ when dealing with US military personnell.

Again, your argument is based on "gut reaction" emotional argument, devoid of any rationale as to WHY Bush should sign this bill? To make you feel better? If that's the only reason, that's not quite enough to pass a law.

 

[michaeledward]

Of course if it's already US Military policy, (See also: Punishable by the Uniform Code of Military Justice) why does it need to be US civilian law? Exactly what purpose is that supposed to serve.

Seems redundant. Perhaps Bush see's it as nothing more than a veiled attempt to take legal jurisdiction from Military courts, and place it in civilian courts. I'll defer to the UCMJ when dealing with US military personnell.

Again, your argument is based on "gut reaction" emotional argument, devoid of any rationale as to WHY Bush should sign this bill? To make you feel better? If that's the only reason, that's not quite enough to pass a law.

Okay, then. How about the President Supporting the will of the American People through the voice of their elected leaders.

90 Senators ---- that's 90 Percent of the Senators ---- support this bill.

The language in the bill is from that liberal nutcase - John McCain - you know, the one member of senate who spent five years as a prisoner of war, actually being tortured. I guess my gut reaction is to trust this guy on this issue, because he knows something about it.

Look, if you want to pretend the President and his adminstration have not sactioned and authorized torture, you go right ahead. But don't try and dissuade those of us who live in reality that it ain't so.

President Bush can't even field questions from soldiers fairly. Did you hear the audio feed from yesterday's Q&A from Iraq. For a half-hour before the interviews (in which the President was supposed to want to hear directly from soldiers), an internal Department of Defense person scripted, and rehearsed the script what the President was going to say, and which soldier was going to answer the question, and how the question was going to be answered.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051013/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_iraq

My position has been consistent. President Bush needs to be impeached, found guilty of giving false statements to the Senate and House (not to mention the American People) and removed from office. I have to imagine supporting him so blindly is getting lonely. What are you, down' to 36% now?

 

[arnisador]

Meanwhile, Hurricane Wilma is now Category 4 and predicted to affect Florida, at least:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051019/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/hurricane_wilma

 

[michaeledward]

Today we learn that the President was told before Hurricane Katrina made landfall that there was a danger of the levee's breaking in New Orleans.

For those of you who missed it, several days after the defication hit the rotary oscillator, President Bush told the nation that "No one could have predicted the levee's would fail.".

But he didn't want to play the Blame Game .... probably cuz he knew who was to blame.

 

[Jeff Boler]

For those of you that missed it....Michaeledward doesn't like the president, and will go to great lengths to blame him for everything from the Gulf War, to the break up of David Lee Roth and Van Halen.

I don't support the President on a number of issues. However, these people go to great lengths to create conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory. To use the Huffington Post and Michael Moore as talking points, is about the same as me using Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock to argue science.

Look...you want to change things? Come up with an agenda, show the American people a BETTER way of doing things, and then run on that platform during the next election. But the hatred, bashing, etc just makes the party look even more rediculous.

It's time for you guys to realize that impeachment is simply something that is not going to happen. You don't have the votes. So why not turn all of that anger into a platform that will get you elected?

 

[heretic888]

But the hatred, bashing, etc just makes the party look even more rediculous.

Ummm..... which political party are we talking about here??

Laterz.

 

[Jeff Boler]

The Toga Party.

 

[michaeledward]

For those of you that missed it....Michaeledward doesn't like the president, and will go to great lengths to blame him for everything from the Gulf War, to the break up of David Lee Roth and Van Halen.

I don't support the President on a number of issues. However, these people go to great lengths to create conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory. To use the Huffington Post and Michael Moore as talking points, is about the same as me using Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock to argue science.

Look...you want to change things? Come up with an agenda, show the American people a BETTER way of doing things, and then run on that platform during the next election. But the hatred, bashing, etc just makes the party look even more rediculous.

It's time for you guys to realize that impeachment is simply something that is not going to happen. You don't have the votes. So why not turn all of that anger into a platform that will get you elected?

Jeff Boler, whether I like the President or not is irrelevant.

Recently, the United States lost one of its most important and historic cities because the Army Corps of Engineers did not properly complete tasks assigned to them; the levees failed because they were poorly constructed; the soil upon which they were built was not adequate to the task.

The President is on tape telling local and state government officials that the Federal Government was fully prepared. Apparently, he meant that the goverment was prepared for Senator McCain's birthday party. Because while New Orleans was drowning, the President was cutting birthday cake.

Today we get further information about how the President was given Intelligence information that contradicted his claims about Iraq before launching his personal vendetta war ... which he ignored.

http://hotstory.nationaljournal.com/articles/0302nj1.htm

The first report, delivered to Bush in early October 2002, was a one-page summary of a National Intelligence Estimate that discussed whether Saddam's procurement of high-strength aluminum tubes was for the purpose of developing a nuclear weapon.

On at least four earlier occasions, beginning in the spring of 2002, according to the same records and sources, the president was informed during his morning intelligence briefing that U.S. intelligence agencies believed it was unlikely that Saddam was an imminent threat to the United States.

 

[Jeff Boler]

Jeff Boler, whether I like the President or not is irrelevant.

No, you're wrong. Your dislike of the President is the very heart of the matter. You are only upset because it is George Bush. If it was anyone else, you wouldn't have a problem with it. That's the problem. You are making this out to be some noble campaign, but the fact of the matter is that your guy lost the last election, and your still pissed off about it.

That's the same problem the Democratic party is having right now. They are attempting to act like all of the issues are some noble campaign to make things better, but in reality, all they are doing is whining and crying, and probably costing themselves the next election as well.

 

[heretic888]

No, you're wrong. Your dislike of the President is the very heart of the matter. You are only upset because it is George Bush. If it was anyone else, you wouldn't have a problem with it. That's the problem. You are making this out to be some noble campaign, but the fact of the matter is that your guy lost the last election, and your still pissed off about it.

Speaking as a psychology major here....

I try to avoid psychoanalyzing people I've never met before. But, that's just me.

Laterz.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

If it walks, quacks and ***** like a duck, its probably a duck.