Did anybody see Mike Brown <b>defending</b> Bush on exactly this tape? He didn't think the president was lying. Batman, you are on a roll. What is it, 3 threads trying to associate GWB with the word lying? Is this a prediction? Houston might beat San Antonio OR San Antonio might beat Houston OR it might be a tie. Here's a prediction: Houston 92 -- San Antonio 85
Cool, giddy. If I said after the game that no one could have predicted that the Rockets (or the Spurs) could have won, after I knew that people had predicted both and had even read those predictions, what would I be doing? Yeah, that's right... I love how the new storyline on this board is that I'm posting too much or posting too much about a certain thing. We're talking about the headlines in every newspaper and blog. Yeah, that's about me. I'm Batman dude, not Superman or Jesus or Yahweh. I don't control the news cycles. I just copy and paste. Call me a drunk, call me a hothead. I'm not a reporter and I don't make the news. Welcome to the radical fringe, cause that's where your damn the torpedoes defense of Bush, against all the facts, places you, while the vast majority of the rest of our nation has finally seen the light. How does it feel?
I also love that you're giving me crap for posting so many Bush Lied threads and giving Bush none for having lied so many times. If you don't like all the Bush lied threads take it up with the liar. But you won't do that, because the thing is you don't care if he lied. You don't care if he lied about Katrina to cover up the fact that he should have but failed to warn or take care of the poor and drowing and dying there and you don't care if he lied to get us into an unnecessary war that the majority of Americans now regard to have been a mistake, even while thousands of innocent Iraqis have died, over 2,000 American soldiers have died and the number of injured American soldiers dwarfs that. Let's be clear: you don't care. If you did, if you just disagreed with my premise and the premise of the majority of our country, you would be in the Bush Lied, Part Two thread to work your usual gymnastics on the semantics there, even while that thread represents a clear indictment of Bush as a liar that lied in order to start a war he'd decided on in advance. Dude, I should be starting twenty threads a day on this stuff and you're mad at me for starting three. Can't blame you I guess. You're in the unfortunate position of having supported all this stuff on account of all these lies -- and worse, being a "pro-life" supporter of blatantly unnecessary death into the bargain. If I were you, I'd be pissed about that. But I guess we're different that way.
And now, in my incredible arrogance brought on by the disasters of the Bush admin, of which I and a million others warned you all, I will channel my favorite BBS poster, the gary, and paste for you the greatest rock and roll song of all time because it is just so ******* relevant. Before you get hot and bothered, Bob Dylan wrote it, not me. Once upon a time you dressed so fine You threw the bums a dime in your prime, didn't you? People'd call, say, "Beware doll, you're bound to fall" You thought they were all kiddin' you You used to laugh about Everybody that was hangin' out Now you don't talk so loud Now you don't seem so proud About having to be scrounging for your next meal. How does it feel How does it feel To be without a home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone? You've gone to the finest school all right, Miss Lonely But you know you only used to get juiced in it And nobody has ever taught you how to live on the street And now you find out you're gonna have to get used to it You said you'd never compromise With the mystery tramp, but now you realize He's not selling any alibis As you stare into the vacuum of his eyes And ask him do you want to make a deal? How does it feel How does it feel To be on your own With no direction home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone? You never turned around to see the frowns on the jugglers and the clowns When they all come down and did tricks for you You never understood that it ain't no good You shouldn't let other people get your kicks for you You used to ride on the chrome horse with your diplomat Who carried on his shoulder a Siamese cat Ain't it hard when you discover that He really wasn't where it's at After he took from you everything he could steal. How does it feel How does it feel To be on your own With no direction home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone? Princess on the steeple and all the pretty people They're drinkin', thinkin' that they got it made Exchanging all kinds of precious gifts and things But you'd better lift your diamond ring, you'd better pawn it babe You used to be so amused At Napoleon in rags and the language that he used Go to him now, he calls you, you can't refuse When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose You're invisible now, you got no secrets to conceal. How does it feel How does it feel To be on your own With no direction home Like a complete unknown Like a rolling stone?
I'm not mad at you... You go overboard on this if it makes you feel better or makes you feel like you are doing your civic duty. I think all that Bush was saying is that there was no certainty that the levees were going to break. Breeching levees had been feared for two decades. How could he lie about that? That was in the public domain. You seem to want to claim that Bush is saying that there was not even discussion of the possibility. Even Mike Brown doesn't agree with that. Bush never said that levees breeching was an impossible outcome; he just said that no one had predicted it (in a manner of certainty). Granted the president has poor communication skills. I do smell political opportunism that seeks to convert that flaw to character issues.
[OPINION] [VIEWPOINT] does not equal [FACT] ----- [FACT] Batman Jones is outspoken about his highly opinionated viewpoint. [VIEWPOINT] This country has more of an education problem than anything. [OPINION]Some dictionary reading would serve a lot of people around here well. No smilie for you!
giddyup, Bush was doing a very specific thing when he issued that quote and he was doing it by design. And it worked. At the time he was under incredible fire for the mismanagement of the crisis and he sought to deflect that criticism by characterizing the disaster in NOLA as an unpredictable freak accident. And you've clearly bought into that characterization as you continually mock people for blaming Bush for the weather. The fact is he was warned by the person whose job it was to warn him about such things, he said no biggie, it happened and then he issued a quote specifically designed to convince pissed off Americans that no one could have predicted such a freak occurrence. That was a lie. You and many others bought it. That's fine. What's gross is that when it was exposed as a lie you defended the liar. That wouldn't be nearly so bad if so many people hadn't died unnecessarily on account of that lie, but they did. The Superdome never should have happened. Bush was warned, he said no biggie. When those warnings came down and Bush had the benefit of them he ought to have shared that benefit with the people that actually had something to lose and that ultimately did lose (or die) but he didn't. Yes, the local government shares the blame like crazy. I won't argue that. But we have FEMA for a reason. As it turns out -- and we didn't know this until yesterday -- they were doing their job. And as it turns out, when warned about the potential impending disaster, Bush said, no that's okay, it'll all work out. What he should have done is to have shared that warning with the people in danger. I'd argue too that he ought to have also ordered an evacuation and made that evacuation possible with federal resources. Instead he said it would all work out, continued his vacation and, as recently as the day before yesterday, said he didn't know how bad it was until he saw it on TV. The president said that. While people were stranded, starving and drowning. After he was warned that that was a good possibility, he said he didn't know it was a problem until he saw it on TV. And after it was all over, he treated it like a freak accident, one that couldn't have been predicted. Even though it was. This isn't a partisan debate. This is about our government doing the base level job they are there for -- to protect us. FEMA, as it turns out, did it's job of warning the president and asking for orders. That's all they're empowered to do. The president said never mind, it'll all be fine. It wasn't. That's on him. I can't even believe you have the nerve to defend him on that.
Is that what he said, giddy? Or what he meant to say? If he hadn't been a poor communicator as you say, do you think he would have said, "No one said the levees would definitely be breached?" Because according to your definition of "predicted" in this thread, that's the only possible thing he might have meant. Is it your feeling that the federal government, that FEMA, ought only to act on things that they are positive will happen? If that's the case, let's cancel the Iraq war and the rest of the "war on terror" and only respond to threats that we know for sure will happen. After all, no one could possibly predict another terrorist attack on the USA. See how stupid that sounds, giddyup? That's what you're defending.
No, that's not what he said; it's what he didn't say-- as i said. It was a storm of unprecedented magnitude with late course changes. Even Brown-- the guy you say was set up by Bush as his patsy-- doesn't claim that Bush was lying; he defends him in a way that you refuse to. That is telling...
<b>Batman Jones .. as you continually mock people for blaming Bush for the weather. </b> I can't help what they wrote... <b>The fact is he was warned by the person whose job it was to warn him about such things, he said no biggie, it happened and then he issued a quote specifically designed to convince pissed off Americans that no one could have predicted such a freak occurrence. That was a lie. You and many others bought it. That's fine. What's gross is that when it was exposed as a lie you defended the liar. That wouldn't be nearly so bad if so many people hadn't died unnecessarily on account of that lie, but they did.</b> This was but one meeting among many. Everybody under-reacted. Brown says it wasn't a lie. You know that old adage about repeating something often enough that it will become the truth... does that work with calling someone a liar? <b>Instead he said it would all work out, continued his vacation and, as
not interested in the politics here, but want to contribute something: Prediction is stochastic in nature. A certainty is a result of deduction. Here, from a scientist.
You mean not saying as in "not asking one single question during the briefing?" If we're going to pin our defense of Bush on the fact that he was warned that the levees would top rather than breach, that makes him out to be even more of a disengaged or ignorant executive. It means he didn't know the levees were dirt or doesn't understand the concept of erosion or just didn't care. Top or breach, take your pick, there's still water in the 9th Ward and our Federal Government was not prepared for water in NOLA regardless of where it came from.
LOL. Politics is not a science -- it's an "art," so to speak. Well it can be said with rather "high degree of certainty" that most of the logics involved in threads like this pertain to inductions. Not all conclusions of inductions are stochastic. A proof by way of mathematical induction is certainly correct. As for deduction, false premise(s) and/or logical fallacy will assuredly render a conclusion invalid.
If Bush says that no one predicted it, then it is a lie. Because we have evidence of someone predicting it. Why are you adding parentheticals to Bush's statement. If he said nobody predicted the levies breaking before they did, it is a lie whether 'Browney' says it is or it isn't, doesn't really matter. You are correct that no one said it was certain that they would break. But they did say it was likely. Is that what you want for a leader? You want a man who won't do anything at all until he knows for certain what is going to happen? A highschool student could run the country if he wasn't expected to act unless he knew for certain what was going to happen. The job of a leader is to take the input of those around him and make decisions, and see that they are carried out. Bush took the input, and did nothing with it, and the lied about it afterwards.
These are the facts. These are not viewpoints. Fact - Prior to Hurricane Katrina hitting people told Bush that it was likely the levies would break, the roof on the superdome might not hold in hurricane force winds, the superdome could flood, there weren't adequate evacuations, the evacuation plans could be in jeopardy if the hurricane hit, and the levies were breached. They predicted what would happen. Fact - Bush claimed no one could have predicted what would happen. What do you call that if not a lie?
Newsflash. Every president is a liar. Bush, Clinton, Bush Sr., even Reagan and Carter. I would not want a president who is incapable of lying for the purposes of successfully fulfilling his commitment as president. I don't agree with Bush on every issue (expecially immigration which I feel he has done nothing to correct), but he is right on most of them. This country is damn lucky to have George Bush in office over some of the alternatives.
Thanks.... and FWIW... http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/3/120101.shtml?s=ic Friday, March 3, 2006 11:54 a.m. EST Bush Didn’t Lie About Levee Breaching Video: Blanco Wrong on Levee Breaches News sources have reported that President Bush lied when he said he wasn’t warned that the levees in New Orleans could be breached during Hurricane Katrina. But a videotape of a key meeting between Bush and hurricane officials supports the president’s contention that the breaching of the levees was unanticipated. On September 1, four days after Katrina struck, Bush said: "I don’t think anybody anticipated a breach of the levees.” The Associated Press on Wednesday claimed that "federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees.” The Democratic National Committee attempted to make political hay out of the AP report, stating that "during the briefing, National Hurricane Center Director Max Mayfield told the president that the integrity of the levees was ‘a very, very grave concern’ that the president appears to have ignored.” However, the tape shows that what Mayfield actually told Bush was: "I don’t think any model can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not, but that’s obviously a very, very grave concern.” Mayfield told NBC News on Thursday that he warned only that the levees might be topped – that is, the storm surge could push water over the top of the levees – not breached, and that on the many conference calls he monitored, "Nobody talked about the possibility of a levee breach or failure until after it happened.” Mayfield even told Bush: "The forecast now suggests that there will be minimal flooding in the City of New Orleans itself.” The Washington Times, commenting on what it called a "hit job” on the president, opined: "If it were true that Mr. Bush heard predictions of levee breaches before the storm hit, then that makes a despicable and costly lie of his statement four days after the hurricane. "The truth, instead, is that no adviser warned the president of the possibility that the levees could fail. Of course, it makes a juicier story to suggest that the president was warned.”
