Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Soothsayer-in-Chief?

Back during the Reagan Administration Democrats made fun of Nancy Reagan for consulting a soothsayer when setting the White House Schedule. But now they seem to think President Bush is supposed to be able to predict the future. The Constitution says that the President is Commander-in-Chief not Soothsayer-in-Chief. But according to Democrats President Bush was supposed to have foreseen everything from 9/11 to the Iraqi insurgency to the flap over the Dubai ports deal, events even Nostradamus didn't predict. Now they are going after Bush for saying in an interview after Hurricane Katrina, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" because a new video shows FEMA officials warning President Bush that the levees might not hold, contradicting what he said in the interview.

I don't think anybody anticipated that this video would come out so isn't it a bit unfair to criticize the President for not predicting this video's release to the news media? If the President did know that this video would be released, I'm sure he wouldn't have said what he did in the interview. Do Democrats think that Bush should consult psychic John Edward or call up Dionne Warwick at the Psychic Friends Network before he does every interview? I think Democrats should stop criticizing the President just because he doesn't have a crystal ball.


, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

10 comments:

TRUE said...

i've been wondering how a neo-con could possible refute such an outright, straight-up LIE and i have to admit, i hadn't thought of this one:

"If the President did know that this video would be released, I'm sure he wouldn't have said what he did in the interview."

i love it! so now we have a new concept of telling the truth: what you say only matters in relation to what you think the public is privvy to...and not something as ridiculous as FACTS.

"i'm sorry, officer, i wouldn't stolen that TV if I had known the security camera was filming me!"

or

"i did not have sex with that woman"

im sure good old billy clint wouldn't have said that if he thought they had ferreal dirt on him having ferreal sex with THAT woman!

BenMerc said...

As a judge said to me many years ago before he threw me in the slammer for 30 days: "Being drunk and ignorant of your personal responsibility to the law is no excuse"

Yet he leads on into the fray, oblivious to the condition of our nation and state or his own criminal negligence. And apparently we allow it.

qrswave said...

Thanks for drawing my attention to your analysis. But, I think I'm going to have to concur with the sound opinions of Justices true and benmarc on this one.

The video is a smoking gun.

zenyenta said...

I don't know. Bush's position seems to be that even if he knew there were no WMD in Iraq, he'd still have invaded. He can't think of any mistakes he might ever have made. I'm sure our Dear Leader had some important reason for making what appears to be a statement that was less than 100% forthcoming and frank. I'm sure that reason relates in some way to our national security. Yeah..national security...that's the ticket.

Derek said...

I have to agree with "true" on this one. When I read that paragraph about "if the president did know that this video would be released . . " my eyebrow went up. You may have a point about people expecting Bush to predict the future, but I don't think your analyses is entirely on target here.

likwidshoe said...

true spits, i've been wondering how a neo-con could possible refute such an outright, straight-up LIE

There was no lie. They didn't anticipate the levees being breached. They were warned that the levees could be topped.

benmerc says, Yet he leads on into the fray, oblivious to the condition of our nation and state or his own criminal negligence. And apparently we allow it.

Useless rhetoric and no argument. Good job!

qrswave says, The video is a smoking gun.

A "smoking gun" for what exactly? Did you even pay attention to what was said? It appears not. You using the video is smoking gun evidence of your own inability to understand simple English.

zenyenta says, I'm sure our Dear Leader had some important reason for making what appears to be a statement that was less than 100% forthcoming and frank.

Yet another one who uses rhetoric and needs a hearing aid. Amazing. You should be embarrassed.

BenMerc said...

Of course it is rhetoric, because we are tired of spelling it out for the deaf and dumb. Besides, you of the right or any Bush apologist at this point in time are beyond reach, so I repeat: It is a fray we have encountered, and the the dysfunctional incompetent leadership of this administration has achieved a level of constitutional over reach that borders on criminality.

Are we really talking about whether or not this man knew that a video was made , or was to be released showing that he had been aware of the intensity of the approaching storm, and that fact is what dictates his concious memory of actually getting involved and doing what we pay him to do? Breached vs topped...give me a break, there were reports a mile thick on the disrepair of that antiquated levee system, under the care of Army Core, last time I looked was a federal agency. If there are definition and technical misunderstandings, that is when you bring in the specialists and get to work. Not go on some friggin fund raiser...you dolts JUST DO NOT GET IT!

Or how about the NSA report on Bin laden written up by Richard Clarke that sat on Condi Rice's desk for six months? Of course no one knew anything about the risk or threat we faced, because they really did not give a damn, they had their own plan for our "national security". It is called the Iraqi war, which has back fired right into Rumfeld's out dated neo-con mind set.

Or lets look at the latest Bush fiasco...A major economic international deal on our port management by an actual foreign country, (not company...yes there is a difference, and this deal was out of protocal) with possible security risk in play, and Bush is not even aware of the details. Exactly,likwidshoe, what is left to debate? I'm all ears bucko.

likwidshoe said...

Of course it is rhetoric, because we are tired of spelling it out for the deaf and dumb.

Do you insult to try to hide the fact that you have no argument?

Besides, you of the right or any Bush apologist at this point in time are beyond reach, so I repeat: It is a fray we have encountered, and the the dysfunctional incompetent leadership of this administration has achieved a level of constitutional over reach that borders on criminality.

Blah blah blah blah.

Get some substance.

Are we really talking about whether or not this man knew that a video was made , or was to be released showing that he had been aware of the intensity of the approaching storm, and that fact is what dictates his concious memory of actually getting involved and doing what we pay him to do?

What?

Breached vs topped...give me a break...

Right. The very real and significant differences between the two words - no longer important. You've been busted as having no argument and now you feel that you can just change the argument mid-stream.

If there are definition and technical misunderstandings, that is when you bring in the specialists and get to work. Not go on some friggin fund raiser...you dolts JUST DO NOT GET IT!

Right. Just blame Bush and insult me. Great plan there!

Or how about the NSA report on Bin laden written up by Richard Clarke that sat on Condi Rice's desk for six months?

You're losing that other argument, so now I get to watch you change the subject to another that you don't understand. Hahaha.

Of course no one knew anything about the risk or threat we faced, because they really did not give a damn, they had their own plan for our "national security". It is called the Iraqi war, which has back fired right into Rumfeld's out dated neo-con mind set.

Uh huh. Sure whatever.

Or lets look at the latest Bush fiasco...A major economic international deal on our port management by an actual foreign country, (not company...yes there is a difference, and this deal was out of protocal) with possible security risk in play, and Bush is not even aware of the details.

Why would Bush be aware of the details? How is that a "Bush fiasco"? You seem like you're reaching.

Exactly,likwidshoe, what is left to debate? I'm all ears bucko.

"Debate"? You don't know how. (Here is your cue to start the name-calling, non-sequiturs, and backpeddling.)

Anonymous said...

This alarm resembles actual abundant the aboriginal replica Rolex and it is aswell a accurate divers’ watch, admitting it has been subjected to a alternation of improvements, to be account of getting beat by James Bond. The ablaze of the admirable precious stones makes the wristwatch angrily comfortable and absorbing but not affected at all.

Sampson said...

Goodness, there is so much useful information above!
here | here | weight loss tips

Google