His Pants Are So On Fire.

I don’t think anybody anticipated the breech of the levees.

It’s simple. Homeboy lied.

What’s the definition of a lie again?

21 Comments

  1. Got this story in my “moveon” update this morning.
    Can we impeach that guy yet?
    If we did, would we be stuck with the truly evil second in command?

    Reply

  2. I might drive do DC this weekend and see if I can’t sell some of these freaking t-shirts. ;]

    Reply

  3. Maybe Brownie WAS doing a heckuva job.

    Reply

  4. I know. Shocking. I think that’s the craziest part and the part I feel most guilty about. I was totally harsh toward Brownie after that. I was so mean to him, I felt bad for him. haha

    Now, it comes out that he may have done his job after all. Shocking.

    Reply

  5. The whole Katria deal was a major f’up. Bush and Brown and crazy ass Nagan and Blanco all failed miserably to protect and serve, in a literal sense. We all knew that if Katrina hit the coast New Orleans would flood and the MS coast would be destroyed. They knew.

    It took a week for the National Guard to get to Hattiesburg and get things under control. A WEEK. Before that everything was chaos, people were robbed, carjacked, murdered- people went without water and food. It was insane. The local police did all that they could as did police officers from all around the state. We were desperate for help and help came too late for many people in Hattiesburg and the Coast and New Orleans.

    Basically we’ve been shown that the Government that we pay to protect us is incapable of doing it’s job.

    The saddest part is that FEMA is STILL NOT DOING ITS JOB. It’s easy to say Brown is the culprit, but there are a whole lot of folks who are still acting in a negligent manner, and that fact is being overlooked.

    Reply

  6. i’m sorry but this is getting tiresome. the government is inept…..it’s like half frozen molasses to get anything to work properly(i deal with it all the time) but there are protocols in place in most situations and in this situation. it starts local then state then federal will come in if asked. bush knew there was flooding, no shit, so did the rest of the country because we watched it on tv. did we know the levees were going to break? no, not even nostradamus predicted it. was it a possibility they would break? yes. it happened, could we have done more? after the fact woulda-coulda-shoulda. but saying, bush should be impeached because he lied(apparently). if they anticipated the levee breach, do you think he would have done what he did? if so, you have to assume he wanted those people to stay there and die!!!!!!???that is absolutely silly. all of this crap revoles around an assumption that people can see into the future plain and simple.

    the statement”….I don’t think anybody anticipated the breech of the levees.” this statement is “absolutely” true when you look from pre-huricane time-frame, but it is “still” true after hurricane time-frame and no matter who says it, me, you, my blanco. since no-one could have known, this is a silly exercise in futility. sorry vent over.

    Reply

  7. greg, he was TOLD specifically RIGHT BEFORE saying the statement above that they were anticipating the levees were going to breech. He was BREIFED ON IT.

    No, of course he didn’t want those people, but he also didn’t take the news he was given and do anything about it. Instead, he flew to California to raise money for something else entirely.

    That’s a lie, brothah. People DID anticipate the breech. He was even told.

    Reply

  8. What’s getting tiring is the fact that Bush is still our president.

    Reply

  9. briefed….still does know mean anything in the grand scheme of things. it doesn’t make his decision illegal or impeachable. no-one will ever know what shoulda-coulda happened. if we expect the government to do everything for us, then yes, he should be impeached for being so inept that he didn’t move the people out sooner overstepping the states rights and the local governments responsibilities. if we spent half the energy that is expended on trying to impeach this guy because of lies, maybe we could get some real political discussions and new ideas out there in the mix. trying to impeach this guy in a “reverse-engineered” way, meaning getting him on “lying” about something that was a completely legal situation is stupid. what we need are new ideas out there that challenge the right or before we know it, the next election is gonna be here and everybody’s gonna go…” oh, shit what’s our platform? we can’t hate bush anymore??”

    Reply

  10. I wasn’t actually saying that his inability to accomplish things is the reason he should be impeached.
    His illegal use of wiretapping, maybe.
    Mostly, I am just very frustrated that he seems to get less competent as time goes by. Though, I don’t think the mistakes made before and after Katrina are as simple as “hindsight is 20/20”

    Reply

  11. Saying that nobody can know the future is a straw man argument, Greg. Knowing probabilities, doing contingency planning, and listening to advisors is, in fact, part of the job. Impeachable? Nope. Worthy of public discourse? Definitely.

    Reply

  12. Well, with all due respect, he hasn’t done gona and got his peener wet, yet.

    methinks his daughters’ bushes have had a few wet peeners but I don’t think Bush has.

    Reply

  13. i’m all for discussion, but this “impeach him for everything” has got a bug up my butt for some reason. maybe it’s the micromanagement that if we just keep looking deeper we’ll nail him as the world passes us bye. “all this with the best intentions and never to offend”-greg

    Reply

  14. I totally see where you’re coming from greg. especially regarding the fact that in three years we’re up again and we might find we spent all our time hating on bush.

    I hear ya, man. I do.

    Reply

  15. Oh, and you should know, I know of several people who silently read this who are often cheering you on. So don’t ever feel like you can’t rant on here.

    That goes for each and every one of you. :]

    Reply

  16. you caught me.
    i totally cheer greg on.
    he’s my hero.
    especially during yesterdays pomo free- for- all. or should that be freefall?
    go greg go!

    Reply

  17. Greg- I agree with you about the impeachment at every turn argument. That seems to draw the focus off the real issues.

    But with all due respect, if you find this so tiresome, I invite you to come stay with my husband and I for a month, in our 12×10 room, while we wait to get back into our home. We were supposed to get a FEMA trailer in September so that we could live on our property but never have. It is a real live issue for many people, even though the event has passed.

    Reply

  18. amanda, i hear you and that is horrible, but like i said, the government runs like a well oiled mud bog. when we can help it we should put as little faith in the government as possible. we here in western pa got hit two years ago with 2 – 1000 year floods in 6 days where people died, lost pets, homes cars, bridges and we’re still waiting for federal money. i’m not saying it’s right, and i’m not saying it’s to the same scale, but i will saying it’s the same ball park. and this sucks but we can’t keep blaming one guy because he’s easy to blame since everyone hates him. i’m not trying marginalise your situation in any means and i hope all works out for you and your family.

    Reply

  19. Greg- I think we are in agreement. shake

    Reply

  20. Overtopping ain’t breaching. (See page 6 of the transcript, where what Bush is warned about is… overtopping, not breaching. Different things, as we should all know by now if we’ve paid any attention, yes? Overtopping lets a little water in during the height of he surge. A breach lets half the lake drain into the city. The difference is real and important.)

    Pretending they’re the same thing because Then You’ve Got The President Finally And Finally He’ll Get Impeached, well… hope that continued Republican Congress in 2006 works out for you, and another Republican President in 2008, ‘cause that line ain’t gonna win any elections.

    (And, well, why no exculpation of Bush for listening to Governor Blanco telling him that the Levees were fine?)

    As always, Reynolds has more. But it’s not, oddly, “Bush lied and it’s all his fault for being a big stupid poopyhead and stuff”.

    Reply

  21. Sigivald: are these proprietary structural engineering terms? How does the semantic difference correlate with the statements that this would be a big, bad, storm, a real disaster? How coud the entrance of ‘a little water’ be referenced so dramatically? Could this be a simple case of people speaking using available and colloquial terms (again – unless ‘overtopping’ is a very specific engineering term – and I don’t know if it is) and apologists now trying to examine the bark on the trees so closely that we forget we’re in a forest (to paraphrase Rachel Maddow)?

    I believe that the possible point of misinterpretation between ‘breach’ and ‘overtop’ can in no way overpower the emphatic warnings regarding the possible disaster, nor can it explain 1300 people back to life, nor can it bring Bush back from the campaign trail, back from vacation, nor can it exculpate him, as the leader of the Federal government, from ultimate responsibility.

    If the terms were ambiguous, and if ‘overtopping’ and ‘breach’ are exclusive and unrelated terms, and if the distinction is proprietary and known, Bush should have sense the misapplication of terms and asked Mayfield, for instance, “Hold on – how can overtopping be a ‘very, very grave concern?’”

    No, Sigivald, I believe a lot of people are trying to fit 1300 bodies through a tiny loophole and the spectacle is just a distraction.

    Reply

Leave a Reply