Well, what do you think about bushs apology?

[madame_zora]

Surely you've all been hearing about this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5091300656.html

But what do you think?

I think an apology is due when someone makes a MISTAKE. When someone intentionally ignores the suffering of his own people in preference of tending to his own career for TWO MORE FUCKING DAYS like this guy did, that's not a mistake, it's a choice.

When a man (and I use the term loosely) goes on national tv and commends his appointed friend "brownie" for fucking up, that's a choice.

I am entirely unimpressed with this pseudo-apology, it is just another political move in his chess game, one he is losing fast. It is an attempt to avoid being drawn and quartered by the American people who are FINALLY seeing him for the self-serving elistist pig he is, we finally know for sure how he feels about the poor and disenfranchised.

So, NOW who wants to support the guy who placed his friends in our government without qualification, who admits now we are not prepared for another attack either from nature or terror, who has sacrificed our blood and brought us no more safety in the purchase, but actually left us weaker, by his own admission? It WAS nice of him to announce our weakness on tv, why not just paint a big black X on us? What a fucking ass. I hope the republicans are proud, regardless of party, this MAN is a disease to our nation.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Its the first time I've ever heard him take responsibility for a FUBAR on his watch.

SG

 

[KinkGuy]

At this point, it's all about damage control and PR. The bush cartel hasn't, doesn't and still won't, care about Americans.

It was insincere, shallow and somehow, insulting. He really didn't "take the blame", he "took responsibility" which can, and will be interpreted in many different ways.

He has said repeatedly, that "we" intend to find out what went right and what went wrong. I don't need to appoint a partisan committee to tell the world that nothing went right and people died because of cronyism, a lack of compassion and everything being about Iraq and pandering to the base. Homeland security spends more time and money spying on our own citizens than it ever has, or will ever devote to actual "security."

If a blowjob can get you impeached...what should crimes against humanity reap?

 

[brainzz_n_dong]

It was about time for Bush to formally own up to the lack of federal "planning/response" for what took place in NO and the rest of the Gulf Coast. The rest of the country and world could see that the local, state, and federal responses were MIA for way too long.

Hopefully, the day isn't far off when Mayor Nagin and Gov Blanco will finally own up to their share of the blame for what passed for a "response" at their respective levels as well in Louisiana. Quoting Mary Landrieu in that article that mz references, she says "Accountability at every level is critical, and leadership begins at the top".

Maybe ONE thing people out of both parties at all levels of gov't might come to realize is that it isn't going to make us any safer, whether the subject at hand is terrorism or disaster response, to create more and more levels of federal bureaucracy. That they were/are inefficient does not excuse any loss of life that took place in NO/LA or all along the Gulf Coast that man somehow could have prevented.

However, if some panel decides that we need yet another Dept of Homeland Hacks to protect us from terrorists or disasters, God save us all.

 

[Dr Rock]

Failure to Effectively Manage Anything

Fanatic Evangelists' Maintenance Allowance

Floods? Eat My Ass

Fucked Everyone's Mother Anally


everyone play too, it's fun

 

[madame_zora]

BnD, thanks for scaring the shit out of me! That is probably exactly what will happen, another excuse to waste more money instead of run things more efficiently. The poll Mark posted lent a better insight to me as to what a conservative stands for- bush is CLEARLY not that! Conservatives, while supporting less personal freedom (ugh&#33 are supposed to stand for LESS government- our bureaucrasy is at an all-time high, I wonder why more people aren't upset?

 

[VeeP]

Originally posted by madame_zora@Sep 14 2005, 10:25 PM
Conservatives, while supporting less personal freedom (ugh&#33 are supposed to stand for LESS government- our bureaucrasy is at an all-time high, I wonder why more people aren't upset?

[post=343368]Quoted post[/post]​

You're absolutely right, pose a very good question, and highlight precisely why so many liberals in this country are continually spitting in the wind. Their arguments just don't hold water when juxtaposed to the facts. Hence they routinely fall short come election day.

I see Bush's "apology" (or "acceptance of responsibility", as I would call it...) as a calculated political move to stifle the left wing nutjobs who themselves have capitalized on this disaster in an egregious attempt to galvanize their base. Fact of the matter is, the Bush admin has outspent the Clinton admin when it comes to programs that aid the impoverished. How many people know this? NONE. Bush himself can't even get the message out.

We need to look to the fine men and women in the U.S. Congress to cut the bullshit and fix the problems. And if they don't, every last one of them should be voted out. Take a look at some of the jerkoffs that continue to be reelected time after time after time, then reevaluate why you think we have the problems we do. We don't need to spend millions of tax dollars "investigating" what happened. That much is clear. A congressional inquiry would evolve into a witch hunt, it's crap and everyone knows it.

 

[dolf250]

I don’t think that an apology will make a difference at this stage. There is more than enough blame for everybody from the white house and FEMA to the local government. I doubt that an oops is going to cover it (and yet what choice is there until your next election?)

Anyhow I need to know if I am crazy or overly jaded and pessimistic. I watched the news and noticed that while the news crews were in cars and boats they were filming “rescues” by choppers. Rather than bring in some of the equipment that the military has that can ford 6 or 8 feet of water or float on it they brought in the most expensive (but impressive) equipment that they own. When after the storm refineries were shut down and there was a shortage of fuel they brought in machines that suck a special mixture back by the gallon. Personally I am of two minds on this. Either it was damn good training for pilots heading over to Iraq or it was to be visible and show people how much they were doing knowing full well that it would make the 6:00 news. It seems strange that rather than bring in a few zodiacs or swamp boats that would rescue people but not garner the attention of a chopper they brought in helicopters, pilots, mechanics and support crews/equipment.

 

[Dorset]

Originally posted by KinkGuy@Sep 15 2005, 01:01 AM
If a blowjob can get you impeached...what should crimes against humanity reap?

[post=343323]Quoted post[/post]​

As an outsider looking in from the UK this is one of those things that make you want to round up all Americans and bang their collective heads together

Don't get me wrong, I like America on the whole but sometimes your morals seem so bizarre. I saw Clinton speak over here and whether you agree with his views or not he comes across as someone who is obviously caring for his country and capable of making strong but fair choices in policy to benefit all sections of society. He was a strong leader. Who cares if an intern sucked him off?

All Americans should have realised during Bush's first term that he doesn't have a clue what happens outside of Washington.

A good example of this is to count the number of wars you have been involved in during the Bush (either of them) reign and Clinton's. The reason the US was strong and relatively free of threat is because Clinton dealt with world affairs and international issues. I doubt Bush even knows where the UK is!

My point is this- yes, Bush can be an idiot, but you should have known this years ago!

Bush got more votes in the last election than he did in the first!!!
America as a country has to take responsibility for the people it elects to power

And a final note aside from New Orleans

The Oxford research institute puts the death toll of innocent civilians in Iraq at over 25,000. At least 1/3 were women and children. And what stability has come from this? Iraq is now on the brink of civil war and America want to pull out
And wasn't this war supposed to free the Iraqi people from the fear of their every day lives?

 

[BBB2.5]

In my eyes ..Bush's apology doesn't mount to a heal beans. He has never cared about the people of America. The only ones he did care about were his wealthy friends. Now look at the state of our country ..another botched job by our pittfull excuse of a President....I sure wish Clinton could run again he was Great. I'm ready to see what Hillary will do.
:hi: :yourock:

 

[SUMYUNGUY]

Clinton wasn't impeeched for getting a blowjob, he was impeeched for lying about it under oath.

Errors were made at all levels leading up to the president, himself. Yet, it's the constant, seething hate and propoganda spewed forth by the left that would have us believe that the blame lies squarely with Bush. From the beginning of the storm to the present, Libs and Dems have been digging deep to find any scrap of idiocy to cling to that would further their assinine, childish crusade against George Bush.
Further, the media played a huge role in all of this political finger pointing. Instead of "reporting", all they did was start a fire and pour gasoline all over it on a daily basis. Why blame a Governor or Mayor who have all the power at their disposal to take care of a natural disaster when you can join the retard train full of Liberals and Democrats on the way to their daily destination of Bush bashing?

Give me a break. This is less about accountability than it is about politics, which is sad.

 

[Dorset]

Originally posted by SUMYUNGUY@Sep 15 2005, 10:56 AM
Clinton wasn't impeeched for getting a blowjob, he was impeeched for lying about it under oath.

[post=343446]Quoted post[/post]​

That's a fair point I suppose, but I still think that it shouldn't have gone so far that he was asked to take the oath. But that neither here nor there though really as rules are rules

As for the media circus rounding on Bush it only seems to be with good reason.
What gets me is that Bush says that everything was being done to get to them but it was a very difficult job. If that was the case then how come every major news station and newspaper from around the globe managed to get there?
The Red Cross were driving around trying to feed the stranded people so how come your army were not moved in to do the same on day 1 instead of day 3 or 4?

Bush has even admitted himself that the response was slow and inadequate so I don't think it's purely a case of Bush bashing

 

[13788]

orionsword57: I no longer listen to what Bush parrots....

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by SUMYUNGUY@Sep 15 2005, 05:56 AM
From the beginning of the storm to the present, Libs and Dems have been digging deep to find any scrap of idiocy to cling to that would further their assinine, childish crusade against George Bush.

No one had to dig deeply at all to find evidence of Dubya's culpability: that was plain to see. The only thing that required a lot of digging was his sense of responsibility because it could only be found at the bottle of the barrel.

 

[Dr Rock]

Originally posted by SUMYUNGUY@Sep 15 2005, 10:56 AM
From the beginning of the storm to the present, Libs and Dems have been digging deep to find any scrap of idiocy to cling to that would further their assinine, childish crusade against George Bush.

uh, welcome to the political arena, hero. now you know why no intelligent person takes any politicians seriously.

Further, the media played a huge role in all of this political finger pointing. Instead of "reporting", all they did was start a fire and pour gasoline all over it on a daily basis.

... and while you're on your feet, let me introduce you to the media. this is what they do. you'll notice that the job of the politicians is to figure out what the media wants them to say; some of them are better at it than others.

as far as bush's "apology" goes - which, incidentally, was even more conditional and spineless than clinton's famous definition of "is" - what does it actually matter? he knows there are no consequences, ergo no responsibility or accountability.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Originally posted by VPee@Sep 15 2005, 06:43 AM
Fact of the matter is, the Bush admin has outspent the Clinton admin when it comes to programs that aid the impoverished. How many people know this? NONE. Bush himself can't even get the message out.

[post=343408]Quoted post[/post]​

Like offering them the option of enlisiting for a tour in the middle east?

Sounds like a GOP talking point to me. Specifics please.

SG

 

[Dr Rock]

who cares? the real point is that NEITHER administration, regardless of the precise amount of money they wasted, has done ANYTHING noticeable to "aid the impoverished."

 

[SUMYUNGUY]

By all means, Mr Whopper, please explain what, exactly, the Presidents responsibility was, both before and after the storm. Where that responsibility started and stopped and while you're at it, perhaps you could also explain what the Governor and Mayors duties were where the President was concerned and if they lived up to those duties within a reasonable amount of time.

I'll even give you a little help.

http://www.fema.gov/library/stafact.shtm#sec305

I doubt you'll actually find out for yourself, though. Par for the course with most of the people complaining and pointing fingers. Governor Blanco not excluded...

"Can you imagine how it would have been perceived if a president of the United States of one party had pre-emptively taken from the female governor of another party the command and control of her forces, unless the security situation made it completely clear that she was unable to effectively execute her command authority and that lawlessness was the inevitable result?" asked one senior administration official, who spoke anonymously because the talks were confidential. "

 

[Lex]

Wow. Like, Newt Gingirch won't even defend Bush on this one, so you KNOW he fucked up. I mean, Newt will back you called black people Niggers and hispanic people Spics--but he came out against the President on this one.

Few people have seen and experienced southern poverty. When they think of poor--too often they think of urban folk living in run-down neighborhoods on public assistance. I have been to rural Mississippi--and I have NEVER before or since seen that type of poverty. People living in shacks on the side of the road--no electricity, no running water.

When over 20% of your people live in this type of poverty--making radio and TV pleas do nothing because they have neither radios nor televisions. The Mayor, Governor, FEMA head and President are ALL to blame for this one. There is no running and hiding. Everyone could have done more. There was no coordination, no unity--no common purpose. Read Time magazine--the feds argued for days over JURISDICTION niceities while people DIED.

Forget all this Dem/Rep stuff. Bush continues to be clueless and we suffer for it. He continues to fuck up and we let him apologize his way out of it. Christ--he was on VACATION and acted like it killed him to come back early. Presidents are supposed to make us feel secure and strong. He failed and the world WATCHED him fail. The buck stops with the HEAD of the Houseshold. And that's him.

The Times-Picayune of New Orleans printed this editorial in its Sunday edition, criticizing the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina and calling on every FEMA official to be fired

Originally posted by The Times-Picayune of New Orleans
An open letter to the President
Dear Mr. President:

We heard you loud and clear Friday when you visited our devastated city and the Gulf Coast and said, "What is not working, we're going to make it right."

Please forgive us if we wait to see proof of your promise before believing you. But we have good reason for our skepticism.

Bienville built New Orleans where he built it for one main reason: It's accessible. The city between the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain was easy to reach in 1718.

How much easier it is to access in 2005 now that there are interstates and bridges, airports and helipads, cruise ships, barges, buses and diesel-powered trucks.

Despite the city's multiple points of entry, our nation's bureaucrats spent days after last week's hurricane wringing their hands, lamenting the fact that they could neither rescue the city's stranded victims nor bring them food, water and medical supplies.

Meanwhile there were journalists, including some who work for The Times-Picayune, going in and out of the city via the Crescent City Connection. On Thursday morning, that crew saw a caravan of 13 Wal-Mart tractor trailers headed into town to bring food, water and supplies to a dying city.

Television reporters were doing live reports from downtown New Orleans streets. Harry Connick Jr. brought in some aid Thursday, and his efforts were the focus of a "Today" show story Friday morning.

Yet, the people trained to protect our nation, the people whose job it is to quickly bring in aid were absent. Those who should have been deploying troops were singing a sad song about how our city was impossible to reach.

We're angry, Mr. President, and we'll be angry long after our beloved city and surrounding parishes have been pumped dry. Our people deserved rescuing. Many who could have been were not. That's to the government's shame.

Mayor Ray Nagin did the right thing Sunday when he allowed those with no other alternative to seek shelter from the storm inside the Louisiana Superdome. We still don't know what the death toll is, but one thing is certain: Had the Superdome not been opened, the city's death toll would have been higher. The toll may even have been exponentially higher.

It was clear to us by late morning Monday that many people inside the Superdome would not be returning home. It should have been clear to our government, Mr. President. So why weren't they evacuated out of the city immediately? We learned seven years ago, when Hurricane Georges threatened, that the Dome isn't suitable as a long-term shelter. So what did state and national officials think would happen to tens of thousands of people trapped inside with no air conditioning, overflowing toilets and dwindling amounts of food, water and other essentials?

State Rep. Karen Carter was right Friday when she said the city didn't have but two urgent needs: "Buses! And gas!" Every official at the Federal Emergency Management Agency should be fired, Director Michael Brown especially.

In a nationally televised interview Thursday night, he said his agency hadn't known until that day that thousands of storm victims were stranded at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center. He gave another nationally televised interview the next morning and said, "We've provided food to the people at the Convention Center so that they've gotten at least one, if not two meals, every single day."

Lies don't get more bald-faced than that, Mr. President.

Yet, when you met with Mr. Brown Friday morning, you told him, "You're doing a heck of a job."

That's unbelievable.

There were thousands of people at the Convention Center because the riverfront is high ground. The fact that so many people had reached there on foot is proof that rescue vehicles could have gotten there, too.

We, who are from New Orleans, are no less American than those who live on the Great Plains or along the Atlantic Seaboard. We're no less important than those from the Pacific Northwest or Appalachia. Our people deserved to be rescued.

No expense should have been spared. No excuses should have been voiced. Especially not one as preposterous as the claim that New Orleans couldn't be reached.

Mr. President, we sincerely hope you fulfill your promise to make our beloved communities work right once again.

When you do, we will be the first to applaud.

 

[Dorset]

Originally posted by Lex@Sep 15 2005, 03:31 PM
Forget all this Dem/Rep stuff

[post=343503]Quoted post[/post]​

This is very true, once the flooding started the politics should have stopped for a while to get it sorted, the reaction to this event has nothing to do with party views or policies and both Republicans and Democrates should have pulled together to show unity over the matter

It's horrible that this kind of event can end in political squabbles played out through the media. A disaster like this doesn't deserve to be reduced to a political feeding frenzy