Political: Bushisms (Including a brand new one)

[faithinkarma]

I do not agree that it was a misrepresentation. Remember this was not MM filming in the classroom. There were reporters and cameras in there. Not one of them has suggested that Bush did anything other than sit there for 7 minutes. Nor has anyone from the Bush camp at any time said that he did not sit there for 7 minutes. They have supported him sitting there, they have defended it, but they have never ever tried to say it is untrue. Can anyone reasonably assume that, if he had got up and done anything, and MM had edited it out, that the adminsitration would not have shown the whole tape by now?

 

[year2late]

By misrepresentation I was trying to give the President at least a benefit of the doubt - that possibly in the full seven minutes he was possibly given other messages or sent messages that we did not see in the tape. Like I said earlier, I cannot fathom why he went ino the classroom in the first place.

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by beattyfamily
Well, did you know that the author of this Boston Globe article also wrote the campaign book, "Kerry-Edwards" and also a Kerry Biography book. He is not exactly an unbiased reporter.

In an article standing by their previous story the Boston Globe also said:

"At the same time, Drudge also erroneously reported that Kranish, a 20-year Globe veteran, had written the introduction to a Kerry-authorized campaign book, "Our Plan for America: Stronger at Home, Respected in the World."

In fact, Baron said, Kranish had no connection to the Kerry campaign book and did not write its introduction.

Baron noted that earlier this summer Kranish worked with PublicAffairs -- the publisher of the Boston Globe biography of Kerry, "John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography by the Boston Globe Reporters Who Know Him Best" -- to write a short introduction to a second project: an independent, unauthorized review of publicly available documents dealing with the platform and policy statements of Kerry and Edwards. That project was in no way connected with the Kerry-Edwards campaign, Baron said.

"When PublicAffairs subsequently struck an agreement with the Kerry campaign to do an official campaign book, Kranish's relationship with the project immediately ended," Baron said.

Peter Osnos, publisher of PublicAffairs, said both Drudge and Amazon, the online bookseller peddling the upcoming Kerry-Edwards book, had made a mistake in suggesting Kranish had written its introduction.

"As far as I can tell, if there's any malign intent here, it was someone making Drudge think Michael was somehow doing something for [Kerry's] campaign," Osnos said.

The Globe book, "John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography," is an unauthorized biography. The work draws on extensive interviews with the candidate, all conducted before 2004. After he emerged as the presumptive Democratic nominee, Kerry declined to cooperate with further interviews.

Amazon, the online bookseller, apparently contributed to the confusion with a listing for the Kerry-approved campaign book indicating Kranish as the author. PublicAffairs' officials said yesterday that Amazon had agreed to revise the listing immediately."

http://www.boston.com/news/politics..._misquote_on_kerry_globe_stands_by_its_story/

 

[Teejay32]

Kerry is just as bad, and the only reason I think people don't pick up on it more is that 90% of the crowd is usually asleep. "The obligation of the United States government is to rapidly internationalize the effort in Iraq, get the target off American troops, bring other people, particularly Muslim-speaking and Arab-speaking Muslim troops, into the region." Kerry, CNN, 7/13/2003. I dunno about him.

Another thing - much of the academic establishment is convinced that Bush is mentally deficient. That he holds degrees from the two premier Ivy League schools makes no difference. His parents "had money and connections, " they say to each other knowingly like it explains everything, which it does...to us out here in the cheap seats, who wonder why even people who paid for pricey Ivy League educations believe that it's no guarantee of intellect. That is funny.

The classroom thing - I just figured he had to be there until the Secret Service decided where to take him. I also looked up Mike Kranish last night, and he was listed as the author of the Kerry-Edwards book on Amazon. It's not Drudge's fault that he assume it meant Kranish wrote the book. Really now.

 

[faithinkarma]

Really now????? Who said it was Drudge's fault? What the article specifically said is :"As far as I can tell, if there's any malign intent here, it was someone making Drudge think Michael was somehow doing something for [Kerry's] campaign,"

Did you miss the part about "Amazon, the online bookseller, apparently contributed to the confusion with a listing for the Kerry-approved campaign book indicating Kranish as the author. PublicAffairs' officials said yesterday that Amazon had agreed to revise the listing immediately."

 

[Teejay32]

I was wrong - it was the B&N site I was looking at last night. From that site:

"Can the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" succeed? In his introduction, the Boston Globe's Michael Kranish provides keen insight into what a Kerry/Edwards administration could mean for America's future.

***

Accreditation
Michael Kranish has worked for the Boston Globe for more than 20 years, including the last 16 in the newspaper's Washington Bureau. He is co-author of John F. Kerry: The Complete Biography (PublicAffairs, 2004)."

The article you quoted at length mentions erroneous reporting about Kranish, which seems to be a recurring problem. I wonder why.

 

[peachgirl]

Kerry is just as bad, and the only reason I think people don't pick up on it more is that 90% of the crowd is usually asleep.

The Republicans aren't asleep. They take note of every breath Kerry takes. Not to worry, should he mis-speak, they will catch it.

This is one time Bush wins over Kerry. No one comes close to Bush and his butchery of the English language.

From the top ten list....

"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream." —LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000

"I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport." —Washington, D.C., Oct. 3, 2001

"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test.'' —George W. Bush, Townsend, Tenn., Feb. 21, 2001

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

 

[Teejay32]

Yeah, those are ok, but they're old.

"I mean, you can go to New York City and you can be in a restaurant and you can meet a foreign leader."

- Kerry, 2004

 

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by Teejay32
Yeah, those are ok, but they're old.

"I mean, you can go to New York City and you can be in a restaurant and you can meet a foreign leader."

- Kerry, 2004

If that's the best you can do for Kerry, quit trying. I don't see anything wrong with that statement. He's speaking correctly and what he says is true. Where's the blunder? It isn't just that Bush says stupid things, it's that he really doesn't know how to speak correctly. His grammar is horrific and it makes him sound ignorant.

Not to worry....there are plenty of recent bushim's. I was just re-living fond memories and golden oldies for a while.

You want recent?

"Give me a chance to be your president and America will be safer and stronger and better." —Still-President George W. Bush, Marquette, Michigan, July 13, 2004

"This has been tough weeks in that country." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 13, 2004

"Obviously, I pray every day there's less casualty." —George W. Bush, Fort Hood, Texas, April 11, 2004

And that's just for starters.

 

[BostonTigger]

That is funny.

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by year2late
Was I the only one that assumed at was a terrorist attack when the news broke about the plane crashing into the WTC....the second one just nailed the assumption.

By misrepresentation I was trying to give the President at least a benefit of the doubt - that possibly in the full seven minutes he was possibly given other messages or sent messages that we did not see in the tape. Like I said earlier, I cannot fathom why he went ino the classroom in the first place.

I think it's hindsight to make that judgment. Two planes crashed today in New Jersey. Weren't there terrorist threats in New Jersey? Should a visit to a classroom have been cancelled on hearing that news?

I'm sure you weren't the only one who assumed it was a terrorist attack from the first plane, but I think most didn't. Just looking at these boards from that morning--it wasn't until the second plane that people were speculating that. Early reports said a small plane.

Shortly after that day, there were published reports that the president was told that a plane crashed into the WTC, a small, twin-engine, and he speculated that the pilot had suffered a heart attack.

I was brought to a secure line and talked to Rice, she told him she was watching reports on tv, they had no information yet on what had happened. I can't imagine that no one was trying to get that information, but obviously Rice was in her office and in no position to be out there on the streets getting it herself.

 

[Nancy]

I'm another one who didn't immediately think terrorists when the first and even when the second plane hit. My first thought was an air traffic controller flipped and gave them a flight path during landing that took them into the towers. After watching the newsclips a few more minutes it dawned on me that couldn't have happened and that's when terrorists entered my mine. It probably took me at least 5 minutes to get to that point and I was watching it happen.

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by year2late
Obviously, it was a misrepresentation. But, I cannot concieve of any reason why he would stay in the classroom instead of making a polite, but quick exit. Also, as I recall, he went into the classroom knowing about the first plane crashing into the WTC (a widely known terrorist target).

Originally posted by faithinkarma
I do not agree that it was a misrepresentation. Remember this was not MM filming in the classroom. There were reporters and cameras in there. Not one of them has suggested that Bush did anything other than sit there for 7 minutes. Nor has anyone from the Bush camp at any time said that he did not sit there for 7 minutes. They have supported him sitting there, they have defended it, but they have never ever tried to say it is untrue. Can anyone reasonably assume that, if he had got up and done anything, and MM had edited it out, that the adminsitration would not have shown the whole tape by now?

The fact is, we don't even know how long Bush sat there.

That the administration hasn't disputed that, indicates nothing. They haven't disputed any of the film and we know for a fact that there are many inaccuracies and misrepresentations.

But you're right--we haven't seen the whole tape. Why not? Why didn't Moore show the whole thing? Why haven't any reporters who filmed it showed the whole thing to verify the time?

We know it was 7 minutes because Michael Moore said it was 7 minutes. We know that in those supposed 7 minutes, he did exactly what Michael Moore showed he did in the 1 or 2--because Michael Moore says that's what happened.

The principal in the room at the time said that the video doesn't convey all that was going on in the classroom. She said:

"Seeing somebody's version who wasn't there is like asking a blind man to paint for me," she said. "There is nothing anyone can tell me to change my perspective, because I was there."

http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040623/NEWS/406230347/1004

This from an ardent Democrat who voted for Clinton and Gore and privately considered Bush a phony.

What do other staff who were there say?

From a teacher waiting in the Media Center for his speech about education:

"There's been a delay. He's busy doing what Presidents do. He'll be here shortly."

We stretched our legs some more and continued to wait.

Finally, "There's been a delay. He has to make some phone calls. He's still coming, though."

Just "doing what Presidents do" while they "make some phone calls" turned out to be the phone calls made in a nearby room to the director of the FBI, the Vice-President, and the Mayor of New York as the first contacts over what happened.

Another teacher waiting in the Media Center:

As I stood on the platform with amazement on my face and pride and honor in my heart, I watched the Secret Service agent walk in my direction. He quickly approached the two congressmen standing immediately in front of me, and my amazement turned to curiosity. I was able to hear all "the important stuff". Within an instant, my curiosity shifted to disappointment as I heard the news of a plane crash into the World Trade Center in New York. "Would the President still visit?", I wondered. Moments later, disappointment was replaced by extreme loss and guilt as I overheard the second conversation. A second plane had crashed into the World Trade Center and it was considered a terrorist attack.

Another Secret Service agent approached the congressmen again and asked them to exit for a briefing with the President.

And another:

The long wait for the President passed swiftly as I took pictures with staff, students, and parents. Shortly before the President arrived in our media center, we were hearing strange announcements. President Bush was on campus, we were told, but he had Presidential duties to attend to and would speak with us shortly.

http://www.sarasota.k12.fl.us/emma/9.11.01/thoughtsindex.html

So, according to these teachers, who wrote these accounts before all the Michael Moore flap, Bush talked to advisors in DC and the mayor of New York and held a briefing with the congressmen present.

He was told at 9:05 or 9:07, I've seen reports of both. If he sat there for 7 minutes, that makes is 9:12 or 9:14. In another 16-18 minutes he teleconferenced, held a briefing with congressmen, watched replays of the second plane hitting on the news, and edited his speech to the nation. Factor moving around time in there from classroom to holding room that had been secured and Media Center and surely discussion with Card, Fleischer and other staff over everything from what was happening to where he would be going next. Not a lot of wiggle room there.

So who even knows if it was 7 minutes. For all we know, it was the 1 or 2 Moore showed.

 

[year2late]

Originally posted by kbeverina
I'm sure you weren't the only one who assumed it was a terrorist attack from the first plane, but I think most didn't. Just looking at these boards from that morning--it wasn't until the second plane that people were speculating that. Early reports said a small plane.

I was watching the news. This was a MAJOR crash into the WTC a known terrorist target. If anyone highly placed in our government did not put two and two together immediatly ---- they should have !

 

[Teejay32]

Originally posted by peachgirl
If that's the best you can do for Kerry, quit trying. I don't see anything wrong with that statement. He's speaking correctly and what he says is true. Where's the blunder? It isn't just that Bush says stupid things, it's that he really doesn't know how to speak correctly. His grammar is horrific and it makes him sound ignorant.

No, no. The best I can do is "Muslim-speaking troops." I feel just the opposite about Kerry - he says a lot of nothing, but does so with wonderful grammar and just the right amount of confidence and electability.

"I do think we have a responsibility, as leaders, to stand up. I think there were people at that, at that concert we had in New York who stepped over the line. I've said that. They don't speak for me. They speak for themselves. I will stand up and struggle, as others have, to try to get that right balance between violence, and sex, and things." - 7/22, with Peter Jennings

 

[ThAnswr]

Originally posted by kbeverina
The fact is, we don't even know how long Bush sat there.

Yes, we do. There are numerous accounts and videos that document what went on at that school on 9/11. Here's a couple you may want to take a look at:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/bush-911.htm

Originally posted by kbeverina
That the administration hasn't disputed that, indicates nothing.

Given this administrations past performance, the fact that they, or their various mouthpieces on Fox or talk radio, haven't disputed the timeline tells you everything need to know. If it was a fallacy, surely Fox or Limbaugh or Hannity or O'Reilly would've pointed it out.

Logic alone should tell you that if they've devoted entire shows to pointing out the discrepancies, why would they ignore what is, in my opinion, the most damning information of all.

Originally posted by kbeverina
They haven't disputed any of the film and we know for a fact that there are many inaccuracies and misrepresentations.

Fox, Hannity, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly have devoted entire shows to pointing out the inaccuracies, except the timeline in the classroom and at the school.

Originally posted by kbeverina
But you're right--we haven't seen the whole tape. Why not? Why didn't Moore show the whole thing? Why haven't any reporters who filmed it showed the whole thing to verify the time?

Excellent question. Why haven't we seen it? I think the public has a right to know, but evidently our media doesn't.

And as for Michael Moore, rmember, as we've been told many times on these boards, Farenheit 911 is not a documentary but propaganda.

Originally posted by kbeverina
We know it was 7 minutes because Michael Moore said it was 7 minutes. We know that in those supposed 7 minutes, he did exactly what Michael Moore showed he did in the 1 or 2--because Michael Moore says that's what happened.

Well this is interesting. Is Farenheit a documentary or propaganda? So now, you're telling us that if Michael Moore didn't show the entire timeline, it must be just 1 or 2 minutes. Really, please make up your mind about Michael Moore.

Originally posted by kbeverina
He was told at 9:05 or 9:07, I've seen reports of both. If he sat there for 7 minutes, that makes is 9:12 or 9:14. In another 16-18 minutes he teleconferenced, held a briefing with congressmen, watched replays of the second plane hitting on the news, and edited his speech to the nation. Factor moving around time in there from classroom to holding room that had been secured and Media Center and surely discussion with Card, Fleischer and other staff over everything from what was happening to where he would be going next. Not a lot of wiggle room there.

Wrong. Bush was told "America is under attack" at approximately 9:03 to 9:07. He stayed in the classroom until 9:12 to 9:13. According to reporters, he lingered in the classroom, and then gave his little speech. He left the school at approximately 9:20.

That's wiggle room I can drive a truck through. Add to this the fact that it was known that at least 3 planes were known to have been hijacked within a few minutes of take-off. The question you ought to be asking yourself is why, given the known information and the terrorism warnings, did the leader of the free world do nothing for at least an hour?

Btw, the Pentagon was hit at 9:37. 20/20 hindsight is good, but maybe the Pentagon could've been saved if George Bush had given the orders to scramble the planes over Washington.

George Tenet knew immediately, when the first plane hit the WTC, that it was terrorists. Maybe if George Bush had taken that August 6 memo a little more seriously and had called his CIA director, maybe things would be different today.

We'll never know, but what we do know is this administration was like a rudderless ship on 9/11.

Originally posted by kbeverina
So who even knows if it was 7 minutes. For all we know, it was the 1 or 2 Moore showed.

Good try, but we do know because of the various reporters and the videos.

Of course, you have to make an effort to find those things.

 

[Kay1]

Very well said, ThAnswr. Thank you for your thoughful post. If the Bush administration wishes to address the " 7 minutes " issue they will. I imagine it's hard for some people to imagine the president just sitting there for so long under the circumstances.

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by ThAnswr
Yes, we do. There are numerous accounts and videos that document what went on at that school on 9/11. Here's a couple you may want to take a look at:

I looked at the sites, downloaded the video, and timed it while I watched it--4 minutes and 40 seconds from the time that Andrew Card told the president to the time he said thank you and the reporters were asked to leave the room.

The kids were in the middle of reading the story to him when he was told, he allowed them to finish reading, made a few comments on how well they did, thanked them and it was over.

In the sites you listed, it was said that Ari Fleischer was in the back of the room and held up a sign written on the back of a legal pad that told him not to say anything yet. At the end, the press was ushered out before he was taken to the holding room, rather than just taking him to the holding room right away. This indicates he was supposed to stay put before going anywhere.

Another interesting thing about those sites--reports of possible assassination attempts that morning? Hadn't heard that before. If true, that could explain why secret service would need extra time to move him from one place to another. Because, particularly in situations like this, the president doesn't have control over his movements--that's under the control of his security.

Your sites just really bolster the speculation that he didn't sit there for 7 minutes and that his staff told him to stay where he was.

Given this administrations past performance, the fact that they, or their various mouthpieces on Fox or talk radio, haven't disputed the timeline tells you everything need to know.

Actually, your video tells me everything I need to know. Thanks for posting it.

Well this is interesting. Is Farenheit a documentary or propaganda? So now, you're telling us that if Michael Moore didn't show the entire timeline, it must be just 1 or 2 minutes. Really, please make up your mind about Michael Moore.

What are you talking about? I said that what we know is what Michael Moore tells us. He shows 1 or 2 minutes of video footage and tells us that this went on for 7 minutes.

But Michael Moore, again, was not truthful. The kids were in the middle of reading a story, Andrew Card comes in and tells the president what happened, Ari Fleischer holds up a sign and tells the president not to say anything yet, the kids finish their story, he compliments their reading skills, thanks them and the press is ushered out of the room. That took a little over 4 and a half minutes.

Wrong. Bush was told "America is under attack" at approximately 9:03 to 9:07. He stayed in the classroom until 9:12 to 9:13. According to reporters, he lingered in the classroom, and then gave his little speech. He left the school at approximately 9:20.

Your own links show him talking on the phone in the holding room at 9:25am. The televised speech was at 9:30. The teachers' personal accounts contradict what you're saying. Whatever reporters you're talking about don't seem to have the story straight.

That's wiggle room I can drive a truck through. Add to this the fact that it was known that at least 3 planes were known to have been hijacked within a few minutes of take-off. The question you ought to be asking yourself is why, given the known information and the terrorism warnings, did the leader of the free world do nothing for at least an hour?

Your own links show that's not true. The teachers who were there say that's not true. I think you're getting some bad info somewhere.

Btw, the Pentagon was hit at 9:37. 20/20 hindsight is good, but maybe the Pentagon could've been saved if George Bush had given the orders to scramble the planes over Washington.

George Tenet knew immediately, when the first plane hit the WTC, that it was terrorists. Maybe if George Bush had taken that August 6 memo a little more seriously and had called his CIA director, maybe things would be different today.

Again, hindsight and a different sentiment. There would never have been acceptance of shooting down commercial airplanes at that time. On this board, people were upset for others suggesting it. When there was a report that the flight was shot down over PA, people on this board were telling others they were nuts. People were angry at the idea that the administration would order a plane shot down.

Imagine if a plane had been shot down what the reaction would be when we discovered the original plan--that at least one of the planes was not to be crashed into a building, but landed and used to make demands. People would be furious, wondering if we'd shot down a plane and those people could have been saved.

 

[kbeverina]

Originally posted by year2late
I was watching the news. This was a MAJOR crash into the WTC a known terrorist target. If anyone highly placed in our government did not put two and two together immediatly ---- they should have !

Maybe so--but John Kerry doesn't have anything over Bush on this one. From his talk with Larry King:

KERRY: I was in the Capitol. We'd just had a meeting -- we'd just come into a leadership meeting in Tom Daschle's office, looking out at the Capitol. And as I came in, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid were standing there, and we watched the second plane come in to the building. And we shortly thereafter sat down at the table and then we just realized nobody could think, and then boom, right behind us, we saw the cloud of explosion at the Pentagon. And then word came from the White House, they were evacuating, and we were to evacuate, and so we immediately began the evacuation.

KERRY: I knew instantaneously with the first. I'm a pilot, and I looked at the weather, and it's what we call in pilot lingo CAVU, ceiling and visibility unlimited. And I knew that that plane did not fly into that building accidentally, as people were speculating. It just doesn't happen, could not, under those circumstances. So I knew it was deliberate, whether it was suicide, whether it was something -- I couldn't tell.

 

[faithinkarma]

That was an excellent post Thanswer. You might have also suggested reading the 9/11 commission report and see what they had to say about the time frame.

It tells the whole tale and it wasn't just the seven minutes in the classroom - it was the time prior to entering the classroom when he knew one plane had hit, it was the time after he left when he spent valuable time putting together a statement to deliver (though he hadn't yet contacted anyone and had no idea what was going on).

"The President remained in the classroom for another five to seven minutes..."


That anyone would jump to the conclusion that Moore lied about this when even the white house has done nothing but defend it, never deny it, is simply silly.