Bush Hits Back at Critics

Dubya has never ever argued about who won the 2000 elections.

True, but that's what still consumed the news until the towers came down. After that moment Dubya's light really began to shine and his approval rating shot up. I'm sure he would gave that back and have the low approval ratings if it meant those 3000 lives would have been spared.

Shalom.

Let me correct myself then. You are blaming everything on the previous CEO.

That's quite a different matter, you must admit. We're not Bush.

At what point does this become Bush's administration?

January 20, 2001. Thank God.

Now, didn't you really mean "when are you guys going to shut up about Clinton?" when you asked that last question? See, I'm figuring out your secret language just fine. It's no wonder the others are having trouble though; they think you're actually saying what you mean.

Q Had there been any warnings that the President knew of? MR. FLEISCHER: No warnings.

You call that a cover up?

Ari was saying there were no warnings that anyone would have flown planes into the WTC on or near 9/11. There were no warnings. There were vague warnings that Al Quaida might hijack airplanes and even vaguer warnings that the terrorist mentality might fly an airplane into a building in a suicide mission.

Give me (and yourself) a break. If they had had warnings, they would have taken action. You would have. I would have. Anyone would have (unless he was too busy in the office with an intern ... strike that - it's in the past ... got to let it go).

Shalom.

Now you're talking to yourself. It must be Miller Time over at your place, Jenna.

but one of the biggest is why it took eight months for the White House to admit it had received early warnings about the day of infamy.

But that is nonsense. On September 16, Cheney said this on Meet The Press:

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, certainly, we were surprised in the sense that, you know, there had been information coming in that a big operation was planned, but that's sort of a trend that you see all the time in these kinds of reports. But we didn't...
MR. RUSSERT: No specific threat?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No specific threat involving really a domestic operation or involving what happened, obviously, the cities, airliner and so forth. We did go on alert with our overseas forces a number of times during the course of the summer when we thought the threat level had risen significantly. So clearly, we were surprised by what happened here. On the other hand, in terms of the sophistication of it, it's interesting to look at, because clearly what happened is you got some people committed to die in the course of the operation, you got them visas, you got them entered into the United States. They came here. Some of them enrolled in our commercial aviation schools and learned to fly, courtesy of our own capabilities here in the United States. Then what they needed in order to execute was some degree of coordination, obviously, in terms of timing. But they needed knives, cardboard cutters, razor blades, whatever it was, and an airline ticket. And that's it. They then were able to take over the aircraft and use our own, you know, heavily loaded with fuel large aircraft to take over and use it.

As I said, I came here looking for answers.

Bull puckey.

I don't see why that's so upsetting.

I think what's upsetting people is that you are making assertions which are known to be contrary to fact, and you are persisting in them long after these assertions have been reliably debunked. You insist on referring to one of those daily "We suspect terrorists are going to hijack an airliner one of these days" statements in a briefing book as a "warning," as though the government should shut down commercial transportation every time some field agent anywhere in the world hears one of these things. Buy a vowel: the intelligence agencies get dozens of these every day. Sifting through them is never going to be an exact science, except in hindsight.

Your behavior therefore is that of a professional Democratic Party spinmeister like Paul Begala or Katie Couric; you simply repeat the discredited assertion continuously, in a Goebbels-like "big lie" fashion, in the hopes that someone merely scanning the thread might read your words, miss the reply, and so come away with the impression that "Bush was warned." This is the same despicable behavior we are now seeing emanate from the Democratic Party Press Relations organization that calls itself "journalism" in this country. Mimicing the disgusting behavior of Democratic Party activists masquerading as journalists, leveling partisan political charges from their perches as "observers," marks you as just another one of them.

A second behavior you engage in which we also commonly see in partisan flying monkeys is that of relying on ignorance of specialized trade or business knowledge to advance an argument that in fact has no substance. "Middle Eastern dudes hanging around flight schools!" Quelle horreur! Except that anyone who knows even a little bit about the commercial aviation industry knows that almost every airline and government in the world that flies Boeing (or now-Boeing McDonnell-Douglas jets) sends their pilots to the United States for training. "Middle Eastern dudes" have been a significant fraction of U.S. flight school attendees for thirty years. There was absolutely nothing unusual about having such people in flight school.

My own view is that this attack is a serious miscalculation by a Party leadership that spends too much time with a narrow circle of associates (and I include the party hacks who are employed as our "mainstream journalists" in this group) who thought they had a prayer of selling this Cynthia McKinney delusion to the American people.

My guess is that if you aren't banned first, you'll be called off by your own employers within the next 24 hours. This attack is a really dumb idea that is going to backfire Big Time on both the Democratic Congressional Leadership and their press sychophants. It fact it may already be too close to November to flip the switches back on all the "could go either way" voters who saw this episode as despicable, disgusting, perhaps bordering on treasonous, and indicative of a political party that has so little to offer that it would stoop to this to try to get elected. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you lost the Senate, and any chance of taking the House, with this attack, and you won't come back from it in time to save your bacon come November.

And Fox News will get another ratings boost, because if this episode showed anything, it's that the news media in the United States cannot be trusted to do anything but blast Democratic Party propaganda through the airwaves, even to the point of telling us that the President of the United States knew of an imminent attack on our soil and did nothing to prevent it. Whatever passes for wisdom in your cocktail circle, that is not the impression the American people have of George W. Bush, and it is not an impression that you can sell them. Rather than listen to such garbage, the people will throw out not only the garbage, but the disgusting little people who tried to sell it to them.

Jenna

nuked by the Moderators since May 17th, 2002

Correctly predicted in Post #53: HERE

Just don't call me Ms. Cleo.

"Seems to be."

"Seems to be" is just another way to say "I think that." "I-think-that-o-crats" love to use terms like that. It's a whole lot easier then using facts. Facts tend to get in their way.