Today on Blogcritics
Home » Bush’s Smoldering Trousers

Bush’s Smoldering Trousers

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

When are people finally going to realize that Bush lies? He doesn’t engage in innocent “white” lies or meaningless fibs to spare people’s feelings – the man prevaricates, dissembles, deceives, lies to achieve his goals and to cover his ass. Even if you don’t believe that he deliberately misled the nation on WMDs and Iraq’s status as an “imminent threat”(and if you are one of these poor, deluded souls, I know some prime real estate in Florida that would interest you), at this point you must admit that there is evidence out there to show categorically that George Walker Bush is a flat-out liar.

“I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of [New Orleans’] levees.” That’s what Bush told reporters – and through them, his constituents – four days after Hurricane Katrina slammed into the US Gulf Coast. The Associated Press reports that the day before the hurricane hit, Bush had been warned about the storm’s likely severity – including the strong possibility that the levees would not hold.

On the eve of Hurricane Katrina’s fateful landfall, President Bush was confident. His homeland security chief appeared relaxed. And warnings of the coming destruction – breached or overrun levees, deaths at the New Orleans Superdome and overwhelming needs for post-storm rescues – were delivered in dramatic terms to all involved. All of it was captured on videotape.

The Associated Press obtained the confidential government video and made it public Wednesday, offering Americans their own inside glimpse into the government’s fateful final Katrina preparations after months of fingerpointing and political recriminations.

“My gut tells me … this is a bad one and a big one,” then-federal disaster chief Michael Brown told the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck the Gulf Coast on Aug. 29.

The president didn’t ask a single question during the briefing but assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: “We are fully prepared.”

Yeah, they were so prepared that it took days for the federal government to respond fully to the crisis. So prepared that four days after Katrina landed, Bush had the audacity to say that no one anticipated that the levee system would fail.

Was Bush told that the levees definitely would not hold? No. On Aug. 28, Max Mayfield of the National Hurricane Center said to an audience that included Bush, “I don’t think any model can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not but that is obviously a very, very grave concern.” Inarguably, the possibility that the levees would fail was anticipated – and an “engaged” Bush knew it.

This can not be sugarcoated: Four days after Katrina massacred the Gulf Coast, Bush said no one anticipated problems with the levees. Without question, he lied to the press, and by extension, to the millions of Americans he knew were listening to his every word.

Of course, the Bush Administration is doing its best to minimize the damage and downplay the video’s contents.

“I hope people don’t draw conclusions from the president getting a single briefing,” Bush spokesman Trent Duffy told the AP. “He received multiple briefings from multiple officials, and he was completely engaged at all times.”

Indeed it would be unfair to draw conclusions from one briefing, but this isn’t about a single briefing. Bush received numerous warnings about the disaster’s potential scope – and about the inability of the levees to withstand a Category Five hurricane.

A Washington Post piece relates the facts regarding another pre-Katrina warning:

A 41-page assessment by the Department of Homeland Security’s National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC), was delivered by e-mail to the White House’s “situation room,” the nerve center where crises are handled, at 1:47 a.m. on Aug. 29, the day the storm hit, according to an e-mail cover sheet accompanying the document.

The NISAC paper warned that a storm of Katrina’s size would “likely lead to severe flooding and/or levee breaching” and specifically noted the potential for levee failures along Lake Pontchartrain.

That same day – again, the day Katrina hit – then-Federal Emergency Management Agency head Michael Brown sent Bush and White House aides urgent reports that the city’s levee pumps were failing. Brown reported this to a US Senate panel in early February.

I’m not very impressed by New Orleans Mayor Ray “Chocolate City” Nagin, but I can agree with this statement of his: “I have kind of a sinking feeling right now in my gut. I mean, I was listening to what people were saying and I was believing them that they didn’t know. So therefore it was an issue of a learning curve. … From this tape it looks like everybody was fully aware.”

Including, according to the White House, the Deceiver-in-Chief. Georgie, you’re doing a heck of a job.

Powered by

About NR Davis

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    I think the lesson from Katrina is that every level of government failed to respond in an efficient, effective, or acceptable manner. That either starts with Nagin and moves to Blanco, Brown, Chertikoff, and Bush or starts with Bush and flows back down to Nagin depending on your particular governmental philosophy.

    The governments failed. Some citizens failed themselves and each other.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    All true. Bush is not the only one to blame for what happened; that, IMO, is indisputable. But nothing changes that *fact* that Bush lied about something of massive consequence. People need to acknowledge that. Nothing good can come from ducking the truth.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    If these reports are true reflections of actual events then President Bush either deliberately lied or forgot about the briefing or briefings.

    If he forgot, that does not say a lot about him or the people who advise(d) him when he has spoken about the governmental response to Katrina.

    If he lied to the people, that is serious. What we do in the way of accountability in that situation is tough. “We the People” have, as a collective, tuned out and gotten turned off by what goes on that lying has nearly become acceptable behavior for political leaders.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Indeed. But it’s all quite clear: It is documented that the possibility of the levees breaking was anticipated. It is documented that the White House and Bush had the info. It is documented via video what Bush heard and said on Aug. 28. And his own staff said that he was fully “engaged” on matters surrounding the hurricane. Sorry, when he said “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees,” he was telling an untruth.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    These news reports seem to indicate as much.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    And as such, that’s bad.

    Forgive me if this seems like diverting attention or excuse making. I contend it is neither. I don’t think it’s good that he lied if he lied and it appears he lied. I still think the more significant issue is how three levels of government fouled up (and reports suggest continue to) foul up disaster relief in the Gulf.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    And I don’t mean to minimize that in any way. Those who fell down on the job at all levels – including Bush – should be held accountable. And Bush’s history of mendacity must be acknowledged. This isn’t an either-or deal.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    And in fairness to you I realize you were writing your article about this latest news suggesting/indicating President Bush was dishonest about what he knew of the levee situation and not the wider government failures. I think, though, the people will be done a real disservice if this turns into another game of “gotcha” politics. Again, I don’t say these things to minimize a public servant/ political leader’s dishonesty. That is important (and all too common and accepted). I just don’t think it’s the most important part of this story.

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    “The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work and then they get elected and prove it.”

    wish i’d written that.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Which I appreciate.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    That, Saleski, is from my hero P.J. O’Rourke. I have based much of my life on his teachings (particularly the whiskey and cigars but that was in college).

  • http://www.markiscranky.org Mark Saleski

    yep. i don’t actually know much about o’rourke but that quote..i like a lot.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    This sounds like as good a time as any to threadjack and brag that O’Rourke is a fellow Toledo-born soul.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    He went, I believe, to Miami (Oh) and was an editor for National Lampoon magazine. He’s on the conservative side of Libertarian when he writes politics but is above that funny and a great writer. He was a disciple of the Hunter S Thompson school of gonzo journalism and was actually a foreign correspondant for Rolling Stone magazine and columnist for Atlantic Monthly as well. I’ve read nearly all his books. He is just great.

  • Nancy

    Surely this is an impeachment offense? This lie – and W’s consistantly deceptive course of behavior ever since he first ran for the WH – just drowns anything Clinton ever did.

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    Nancy, that is the problem we get into with these kinds of stories. If we are going to start impeaching every president who has lied to the people we won’t have to worry about too many
    presidents being term limited out any more.

    Bush lied to the American people (apparently) and Clinton seemed to lie under oath (he wasn’t removed from office but did have his law license suspended or otherwise sanctioned in some form so there’s that). Which is worse? Bush for the seriousness of the subject matter or Clinton for doing it in a legal preceeding?

    Now you get Blue jersey wearers and Red jersey wearers all in a tizzy arguing over this side issue (although public dishonesty is not trivial) and the conversation about making the government more responsive and effective gets pushed to the side.

  • Nancy

    It’s not just the lies, it’s the nature of the lies. I understand the president of the US can’t Tell All; but in situations such as Katrina, I don’t expect & won’t tolerate this kind of self-aggrandizing, ass-covering, outright stupid lying. Michael Brown really ought to sue Bush for defamation. I’m glad he finally stood up & started refusing to be Dubya’s whipping boy. This administration is out of control: what they don’t lie about, they ignore, & claim executive privilege. It’s past time to put a fast halt to it. If anyone in congress had a spine and an ounce of decency, they’d be lining Bush & his buddies up against a wall & shooting.

  • MCH

    And the lie that always jumps out in my mind, Ms. Davis, is when GW said that the reason he wasn’t flying at Dannelly AFB while in the Guards in 1972 was because “they didn’t have the same type of airplanes there”…when the truth was, he had in fact already permanently grounded himself by skipping a mandatory physical.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    P.S., re: headline – “Trousers” is a very underused word, right between “britches” and “pantaloons.”

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    “Trousers” and “underpants” are both good and underused words.

  • http://journals.aol.com/vicl04/THESAVAGEQUIETSEPTEMBERSUN/ Victor Lana

    Hey guys, whatever happened to “slacks”? I haven’t heard that in a while.

  • http://jpsgoddamnblog.blogspot.com JP

    This is also similar to an inaccurate comment Condoleezza made about 9/11: “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile.”

  • Fred Evil

    I for one am horrified at the way the administration has allowed Michael Brown to be thrown under the FLEET of buses that they recently drove over him…..I originally thought this guy Brown was a worthless tool…..only to find out that while he’s certainly not squeaky clean, he ain’t as bad as the administration made him out to be!!

    In a large public corporation, now would be the time for the board of directors to quietly ask for the CEO’s resignation, and if they didn’t get it, force him out….IF SOMEONE ISN’T DOING THEIR JOB, THEY GET FIRED!!

    What has Bush done RIGHT?! We certainly have our fair share of political posturing and finger-pointing going on, but Bush himself has said he takes reponsibility for the disaster. He hired these guys, and he should’ve fired these guys, at least Chertoff….how many lost their lives in Katrina? I have heard a lot of numbers, 2-3000 maybe? maybe more, maybe less, I don’t know. But if you run a snowplow company, and a big blizzard is coming, and you assure everyone that you’ve got ‘em covered, and then it hits, 5 feet of snow, and you don’t even start the plows for a couple of days, meanwhile people freeze to death in their homes, car accidents abound, who’s at fault? Who gets sued? Who is liable? It seems clear to me, that Bush WAS advised that it was distinctly possible that flooding, and maybe SERIOUS flooding, could/would occur, yet days later, he stated that no one considered the possibility the levees would fail…?! They are only rated for a Cat3 storm at most, and this was a big Cat5 less than 24 hours before landfall, how could they be doing their jobs, if they WEREN’T considering that possibility?! Heck, I sat at home, and watched the coverage, and -I- considered the possibility!!What is it going to take, for the people of this country to realize that this guy is WAY out of his depth? He’s knocked out two foreign sovereign state governments, he’s only half-built the replacements, and they’re crumbling like the levees in New Orelans. Please help me understand how he still has his job….?

    Bush is a liar just like Clinton, only Bush does it far more often, and Clinton didn’t kill anyone first….

  • Bliffle

    GWB is a weak man who says whatever he thinks he has to say when he’s under pressure. True or not. We’ve all known kids like that. Wasn’t there a guy called Eddy Haskell on Leave it To Beaver like that? Anyway, if you let a kid get away with fibbing his way out of uncomfortable situations this is what you get as a grownup. Irresponsibility.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Bush is a liar just like Clinton, only Bush does it far more often, and Clinton didn’t kill anyone first….

    Tell that to the soldiers who died in Somalia. And for that matter, it can be argued that many of the deaths in Iraq fall to Clinton because the military he left us to work with there was so weakened and unprepared for conflict. The lack of body and vehicle armor certainly falls to his defense cuts, so lay all those deaths on him too.

    Dave

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    All true. But this essay is about Bush’s lying, not Clinton’s.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Ah, but I’m still not convinced that Bush is the liar he’s so often made out to be. I think he speaks from a different perspective, but that’s not exactly the same as the kind of deliberate lying portrayed in this article.

    Dave

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Well, that doesn’t surprise me in the slightest; Bush’s approval rating, though plummeting, is not at zero. You certainly are entitled to believe what you will.

  • RedTard

    Natty,

    The old Bush lied BS, don’t you have some policy initiatives of your own to support or do you just enjoy making personal assaults on people.

    You have pretty scant evidence to support your claim. Someone said somewhere that the levees could possibly be topped, doesn’t sound like a warning that they would be breached to me. The levees were designed to withstand Category 3, the part of the storm that his NO was Cat 3.

    August is not long ago enough to start rewriting history about how Bush lied. People can still remember the facts. When the storm turned away from a direct strike on NO everyone from the media to state and local officials on up breathed a collective sigh of relief. The immediate reports after the storm indicated that the city had escaped catastrophic damage.

    If someone did know about the levee breach earlier it might have been drowned out by the media’s coverage of roving bands of blacks raping and pillaging inside the superdome. Where is the investigation into that lie. The liberal media gets a pass on it’s totally fabricated crap because in general it supports the loony left.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Ms. Davis,

    I wrote the following in an article that is probably too long to see the light of publication here.

    “Last year, another event occurred that began on Tish’a B’Av. This was Hurricane Katrina. The tropical depression that was to develop into this storm began on Tish’a B’Av. It emerged as a major storm in the Caribbean just as the process of expelling Jews from Gush Katif was being completed. It struck as the Jewish graves there were disinterred.

    The parallels between the forced homelessness of 10,000 Jews and the homelessness of hundreds of thousands of residents of New Orleans are scary. The reports of floating coffins eerily reflect the dead bodies removed from Jewish Gaza.

    Like the Shoemaker-Levy comet, which fell apart under Jupiter’s gravitational pull and collapsed into twenty-one separate asteroids on Tish’a B’Av in 1994, Hurricane Katrina may have also been the Finger of G-d telling us to wake up and smell the heavenly coffee.”

    Bush is being seduced into disaster. His policies are bankrupting the United States internally, and in order to draw attention away from the disasters at home, he has pursued adventures overseas. His war in Iraq is turning into a disaster. His inability to deal with a hurricane that was a foreseeable disaster – the Louisiana legislature had funded strengthening the levees but the funds were hamstrung by the feds – displays that he is an incompetent in internal management.

    Bush will now be drawn into attacking Iran – partly because of the euro-bourse developing there that can threaten the economy, and partly because he needs to draw eyes away from his disastrous policies in America.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Ruvy, thank you for sharing that essay excerpt. I appreciate having the opportunity to read it. Ies it possible to see the piece in its entirety, and perhaps share the excerpt with AF&O readers?

    Mr. RedTard, the very fact that you start your comment with an assault against me (and that you have a poor grasp of the facts) discounts anything you say afterward. It is a waste of my time to deal with you at all.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Redtard: “Someone said somewhere that the levees could possibly be topped, doesn’t sound like a warning that they would be breached to me. The levees were designed to withstand Category 3, the part of the storm that his NO was Cat 3.

    Actually, a Cat-5 storm against Cat-3 levees sounds like a definite warning of a breach.

  • lumpy

    No one with even a passing familiarity with NO and the surrounding area, which Bush certainly has, is unaware of the limitations of the levee system. Bush certainly knew they were likely to be breached, but I’m sure he also knew there wasn’t a damned thing he could do to prevent it.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Ms. Davis. Feel free to share this excerpt on AF&0. I’ll try and ig out yuu e-mail address and send you the entire article. I must warn you that it deals with Jewish themes, themes which you probably will have little familiarity with.

    Shavua Tov

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Ruvy, thanks. [Personal contact info deleted. Sorry] I’ll look forward to seeing the article. And I am probably more familiar with the themes, or at least some of them, than you might guess.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Ms. Davis,

    Look up my e-mail address at my blogsite and send me an e-mail with the data that the comments editor deleted, and I’ll happily send you the article.

  • Scott Butki

    Redtard, there is a huge difference between your characterization of the AP briefing as
    “Someone said somewhere that the levees could possibly be topped, doesn’t sound like a warning that they would be breached to me. ”

    and this:
    “My gut tells me … this is a bad one and a big one,” then-federal disaster chief Michael Brown told the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck the Gulf Coast on Aug. 29.

    and – from the link to the AP story –
    “I’m concerned about … their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe,” Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.

  • Bliffle

    Dave: “Ah, but I’m still not convinced that Bush is the liar he’s so often made out to be.”

    I don’t think he’s a pathological liar, like my 2nd wife was (she’d prefer a lie to the truth because then she controlled The World, a godlike quality). I think he lies, as most of us do, to avoid discomfort. He’s different from most of us, however, because he’s never been confronted about his lies, which happened to most of us when we were young, thus inhibiting subsequent lying. Most of us reduce our lying as we age, not necessarily out of increased virtue, but rather chagrin at what lies cost us when we were confronted.

    I think GWB lies like a child, as an impulse to reduce shame and discomfort. The difference between GWB and most of us is that he has great power, enough to intimidate people into not confronting him. He calls it ‘loyalty’.

  • http://jpsgoddamnblog.blogspot.com JP

    DJRadiohead, I must comment on #16–you wrote:
    “Nancy, that is the problem we get into with these kinds of stories. If we are going to start impeaching every president who has lied to the people…”

    That is exactly the reason the impeachment of Clinton for a lie that was unrelated to his fulfillment of duty is so damaging to our democracy–now Bush is, arguably, pushing the envelope on secrecy and “Truthiness” much farther than Clinton and we are stuck with the possibility of 2 impeachments in a row, which no-one wants. Therefore we’re reluctant to consider exercising one of the most difficult of proceedings in our Constitution, because it was used frivolously in the past.

  • Scott Butki

    Exactly!

  • Bliffle

    Impeachment? Call Henry Hyde! He has experience and he’s turning on GWB.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    It seems the AP ran a correction on this story:

    WASHINGTON – In a March 1 story, The Associated Press reported that federal disaster officials warned President George W. Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees in New Orleans, citing confidential video footage of an Aug. 28 briefing among U.S. officials.

    The Army Corps of Engineers considers a breach a hole developing in a levee rather than an overrun. The story should have made clear that Bush was warned about flood waters overrunning the levees, rather than the levees breaking.

    The day before the storm hit, Bush was told there were grave concerns that the levees could be overrun. It wasn’t until the next morning, as the storm was hitting, that Michael Brown, then head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said Bush had inquired about reports of breaches. Bush did not participate in that briefing.

    Oh man. Bush got us all good again.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    I will consider Bush in the clear when a “breach” is worse than overrun levees. But, his mispronunciation of “nuclear” notwithstanding, it appears that Shrubbie is in Clinton’s class as a semantics dancer. Flap, flap and ball change, Bushie, then shuffle off to Buffalo…

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    Basically. He’s just damn good. He looks dumb and talks dumb, but he knows exactly what he’s saying when he says it I think that part of him infuriates his critics way more than the policies itself.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Nah. For me, it’s the policies. Episodes like this merely remind me of what I already know: Bush is not to be trusted.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle


    I think GWB lies like a child, as an impulse to reduce shame and discomfort.

    I think a lot of people find it very comforting to tell themselves things like this, even when the facts don’t bear out such a belief. What’s actually going on is that Bush is operating on a different set of paradigms and from motivations which they don’t understand, so they deny and call him a liar and that helps them not come to grips with the same realities which Bush has had to face and deal with.

    Dave

  • troll

    Dave – *What’s actually going on is that Bush is operating on a different set of paradigms and from motivations which they don’t understand*

    want to flesh this statement out – ?

    is this the ‘leader as ubermench’/’father knows best’ argument – ?

  • Bliffle

    Dave: “…so they deny and call him a liar and that helps them not come to grips with the same realities which Bush has had to face and deal with.”

    Such as?

  • MCH

    “Basically. He’s just damn good. He looks dumb and talks dumb, but he knows exactly what he’s saying when he says it I think that part of him infuriates his critics way more than the policies itself.”

    So you understood what he meant by, “I know how hard it is to put food on your family.”

    …???

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    I do. I’ve been trying to butter my youngest daughter all night.

    Dave

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis,

    If it’s taking all night, she probably isn’t buying the buttering up. Give her cash instead.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    If you’ve paid attention at all, MCH, you’d know that President Bush is a staunch supporter of family food fights.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    The Bushes truly are the first family of family values. Neil can kill a man with his hands, Bar is ready to die, Jeb is packin’ heat. (Who can guess the reference?)

  • Bliffle

    Dave: “I think a lot of people find it very comforting to tell themselves things like this, even when the facts don’t bear out such a belief.”

    I’ve watched GWB speaking on a couple occasions when he started speaking ad libitum and made egregious lies to support his point. He just made things up ‘off the cuff’ as it were. Think what you will, I find him untrustworthy and unreliable.

  • Dave Nalle

    If it’s taking all night, she probably isn’t buying the buttering up. Give her cash instead.

    I already gave all my cash to the teenager. All I have left is butter.

    Dave

  • Rene

    That there are still support for Bush is mind boggling to say the least.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Rene, I don’t support Bush. I just despise those who oppose him for bogus reasons.

    Dave

  • Nancy

    Dave, at this point, there ARE no bogus reasons. W has provided so many bona fides, we’re awash in ‘em. LOL ref: buttering your daughter. The mental image is great. How old is she?

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    You mean reasons *you* consider bogus.

    And the truth is out – you spend so much time accusing others of hating Bush, but *you* are the one who hates people. *You* hate (at the very least) most Bush supporters. Wow… You’ve said some nasty things in the past, but that has got to be the nastiest.

  • Dave Nalle

    NRD, that last one was a bit incomprehensible. I don’t hate, I ‘despise’. Not the same thing, really. And I only despise people who deceive themselves and seek to deceive others. Those who are genuinely confused or hold different beliefs for legitimate reasons I have no problem with. But I’m not in the hate business.

    Dave

  • MCH

    “And I only despise people who deceive themselves and seek to deceive others.”

    A little hard on yourself there, Nalle.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    Mr. Nalle, I checked several dictionaries and Roget’s thesaurus. “Hate” and “despise” are synoymns; they are interchangeable. But if you say you hate no one, I will take you at your word.

  • Dave Nalle

    Odd. Dictionary.com doesn’t have them as synonyms, nor does my copy of the OED. Despise means to scorn, and you can scorn something without hating it. Things you scorn are beneath your hate.

    Dave

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Could I take the trouble to remind everyone that this article is about Bush’s smoldering trousers, not those of Dave Nalle, or of Ms. Davis.

    Could we call in a fire brigade and a tailor, please, for your poor president? He appears to need one.

    On second thought, I could probably supply the tailor for just above wholesale rates… just the fire brigade, please.

  • Maurice

    I have this feeling that Bush’s thinking abilities match his verbal skills. If that is true he is innocent of far reaching thought or critical analysis. Being a liar would require much more cunning than I give him credit for.

    He gets briefed everyday about this potential disaster and that possible crisis. It would require a sophisticated mind to distill all the information he receives and actually guess the correct course of action.

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    You’re right, Ruvy, thanks.

    Mr. Maurice, I suspect Bush is much more cunning than you think. In any case, it doesn’t take much intelligence to know that lying is wrong. And I don’t care how it’s parsed: Saying that no one anticipated what happened was misleading (and I believe deliberately so), however carefully worded the statement.

  • Maurice

    If Bush is so cunning why are his obvious missteps so er…obvious?

    To put it in perspective I would say that Bush is more like Carter than Nixon. Nixon was cunning. Carter lacked any critical reasoning powers or verbal restraint. Remember when Carter told the world ‘we have planes you cannot see’? That is the kind of wide eyed innocence and lack of cunning I would ascribe to Bush.

  • http://victorplenty.blogspot.com Victor Plenty

    Non-obvious missteps don’t mislead opponents to misunderestimate your powers.

  • Maurice
  • http://jpsgoddamnblog.blogspot.com JP

    Matthew, which George W. Bush are you watching? “Basically. He’s just damn good. He looks dumb and talks dumb, but he knows exactly what he’s saying when he says it I think that part of him infuriates his critics way more than the policies itself.” (#44)

    This is the same guy who doesn’t even know what to call the State of the Union address? “And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That’s what I asked—4,000 hours.” —Bridgeport, Conn., April 9, 2002

  • http://jpsgoddamnblog.blogspot.com JP

    Maurice, (#65) “I have this feeling that Bush’s thinking abilities match his verbal skills. If that is true he is innocent of far reaching thought or critical analysis. Being a liar would require much more cunning than I give him credit for.”

    I am right there with you. This is why it’s absolutely mortifying that he’s President. Of course Dick Cheney is really running the show, but I’m glad I was out of New Orleans before this happened, I certainly wouldn’t want to be at this clown’s mercy.

  • Dan

    The AP lied, admitted they lied, and the left totally ignores the fact that the AP lied. They follow their “leaders” (the left stream press and the Demoncrats) without trying to find the facts. How disgusting!

    Bush was told the levies might be OVERRUN, was told by the Governor of Lousiana they weren’t breached (when they were), told the press no one told him they were breached (which they hadn’t) and he gets jumped on by the lefties. How disgusting!

  • http://gratefuldread.net NR Davis

    I don’t see that AP lied. I believe it made an error and corrected it after the fact. What you seem to miss is that a breach is less worrisome (though terrible nonetheless) than an overrun. Bush said no one anticipated it, which is just plain untrue. Of course it was anticipated. It appears, MR. Dan, that you, Bush sycophant that you apparently are, can’t accept that your guy screwed up and tried to talk his way around it – talk about disgusting.

  • Scott Butki

    The AP did what Bush seems afraid of ever doing, admitting that he may have been wrong on any detail, major minor. In this case the correction doesn’t change the fact that Bush was hearing about the possible breach days before he told the public that nobody expected a breach.
    TEll me what kind of lie that sounds like to you?

  • http://jpsgoddamnblog.blogspot.com JP

    Dan, didn’t he actually say he didn’t think anyone could have anticipated the breach? Meaning that it was so outlandish a possibility it was beyond reason? We all know that’s not the case, with multiple news stories about it from multiple sources…

  • sr

    Ruven #30. Bush will be drawn into attacking Iran.
    Bullshit. That should be the job of Isreal. Your in the bulls eye first. You say Bush is seduced into disater and bankrupting the US. Where does that leave Isreal. NO DENIRO. Dam Ruven, you just pissed me off. Since you think Im a fucking idiot Im sure you will not comment. Maybe you are a two faced Jew. Have always been behind you. No more.
    Dave Nalle is the only one who understands. Good job Dave. All others suck.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy in Jerusalem

    sr,

    You needn’t be “behind” me. You’re a third of a world away. But pick up you Bible and read in Ezekiel Chapters 38 and 39. G-d warns that he will seduce G-g and give him the idea to attack Israel. It describes in utterly clear detail, how G-d will lead G-g to take actions that will cause his own death on the hills of my country, where he will be enriched bird food for the vultures and crows. George Bush, either senior or junior, is Gog. The family descends from the Gog and Magog Hills in England. Bush Sr.’s nickname in the “Skull & Bones” society he belonged to was “Magog”. The Shrub’s nickname in the same society was “Goggie”.

    Bush is not the sharpest tool in the toolshed, to quote John Loftus. He is a fellow who can be led around. And he is being led around. He was led around to attack Iraq, and he will be led around to attack Iran. And eventually, he will be led around to attack us. He and his family are evil and they will come upon evil days.

  • Justin Berry

    NRD Why would a breach be less worrisome than an overrun? In an overrun you just pump the water out when the surge receeds, in a breach you have to repair the levee before you can pump the water out. just curious.

  • Dan

    JP #75

    He was told by the GOVERNOR (Demoncrat) of Lousiana that the levies had NOT been breeched. Should he have assumed she is a liar just like you like to assume Bush is a liar?

    Get a life!

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Based on the fact that she’s a Democrat from Louisiana he probably should indeed have assumed she was a liar.

    Dave