Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: abstract who wrote (62488)	9/14/2005 4:33:28 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 65232

Bush Takes Responsibility For Gaps In Federal Response By Mark on Hurricane Katrina Decision '08 More importantly, he focused on what the response might reveal regarding our ability to handle other disasters or attacks: Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government. And to the extent that the federal government didn’t fully do its job right, I take responsibility. I want to know what went right and what went wrong. I want to know how to better cooperate with state and local government, to be able to answer that very question that you asked: Are we capable of dealing with a severe attack or another severe storm. And that’s a very important question. And it’s in our national interest that we find out exactly what went on and — so that we can better respond. One thing for certain; having been down there three times and have seen how hard people are working, I’m not going to defend the process going in, but I am going to defend the people who are on the front line of saving lives. Those Coast Guard kids pulling people out of the — out of the floods are — did heroic work. The first responders on the ground, whether they be state folks or local folks, did everything they could. There’s a lot of people that are — have done a lot of hard work to save lives. And so I want to know what went right and what went wrong to address those. But I also want people in America to understand how hard people are working to save lives down there in not only New Orleans, but surrounding parishes and along the Gulf Coast. It’s getting big play, and it’s the right - and the smart - thing to do. So what does the Huffington Post lead with? Bush: No Identifiable Shortcomings In Relief Effort……and Deepak Chopra is still talking about Cindy Sheehan. BwaaaaHaaaaHaaaa… decision08.net whitehouse.gov huffingtonpost.com huffingtonpost.com

To: abstract who wrote (62488)	9/14/2005 4:36:13 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 65232

…. That Bush is taking full responsibility “to the extent the federal government didn’t fully do its job right” is telling; his carefully chosen qualification contains the hope that honest assessments will, as seems more and more likely, reveal that the federal response—while at points halting, in the way of all bureaucratic operations—was largely a remarkable success, particularly in that it had to improvise after the total breakdown of the local plan and the collapse of both the first-responder component and the Governor’s hesitant leadership.…. protein wisdom proteinwisdom.com

To: abstract who wrote (62488)	9/14/2005 4:37:13 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 65232

Why I despise the AP and MSM By Mark in Mexico << Bush Takes Responsibility for Blunders >> No, he did not. And AP's article clearly demonstrates that he did not. Here is what Bush said, taken directly from the AP article. "To the extent the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility," Bush said. Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for issuing an evacuation order 24 hours later that it should have been issued (Nagin & Blanco)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for allowing 300 city buses to sit idle before the storm hit while 100,000 people could not evacuate (Nagin)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for refusing the offer from Amtrack to load up their last train out of New Orleans with evacuees (Nagin)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for allowing those same 300 buses to drown in the floodwaters after the storm passed (Nagin)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for directing storm escapees to the Super Dome and Convention Center with no food, water or security (Nagin)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for refusing to allow the Red Cross to enter the city with food, water, ice, medicine, doctors, blankets, pillows, clothing etc. to help those stranded, starving and under siege in the Super Dome and the Convention Center (Blanco)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for the state of Louisiana needing 24 hours of study (read: estimate political damage) before finally say, "No" to his offer to share jurisdiction over the federal troops and state National Guard (Blanco)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for blockading the only dry route out of the city and firing over the heads of desperate refugees to stop them from leaving and keeping them trapped in the city without food, water, sanitation or security (Gretna, La., Police Chief Arthur Lawson)? Does that sound like he's taking responsibility for the city and state's failure to implement their own disaster response plan (Nagin, Blanco)? The AP article compounds its distortion, or lie, if you like, with this: <<< President Bush said Tuesday that "I take responsibility" for failures in dealing with Hurricane Katrina and said the disaster raised broader questions about the government's ability to respond to natural disasters as well as terror attacks. >>> Notice that it only quotes "I take responsibility" and removes that quoted passage completely from the context of what Bush actually said. <<< As for blunders in the federal response, "I'm not going to defend the process going in," Bush said. "I am going to defend the people saving lives." >>> I have yet to see a single documented incident of "blunders in the federal response". Not one. And documented, not alleged by some squealing partisan hack or politician. But this one may be the most egregious of all: <<< Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff introduced Paulison as the Bush administration tried to deflect criticism for the sluggish initial federal response to the hurricane and its disastrous aftermath. >>> The AP cannot even find a quote to take out of context to support the "deflect criticism" charge. Read the entire article and see if you can find any federal official quoted as saying anything that would be an attempt to deflect criticism. It's not there. Man, I hate those guys. markinmexico.blogspot.com news.yahoo.com sfgate.com

To: abstract who wrote (62488)	9/14/2005 4:39:02 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 65232

Press ignores Talabani’s grateful praise By TheAnchoress on US Military “In the name of Iraqi people, I say to you, Mr. President, and to the glorious American people, thank you, thank you. Thank you, because you liberated us from the worst kind of dictatorship.” “Mr. President, you are a visionary, great statesman. We salute you. We are grateful to you. We will never forget what you have done for our people.” Iraqi President Jalal Talabani September 13, 2005 Try to find some coverage of this on the television - you won’t see more than 30 seconds of it, and it’s all about the press playing “gotcha” with President Bush. This is a historic moment…Talabani’s generous and moving statement should have been a moment of national pride - a moment for all of us to consider the great sacrifices made by our troops and their families to bring Iraq’s great hope about. Instead…pushed aside because the press is interested in NOTHING but “getting” Bush. Not a single question to Talabani. This is sick, sick, SICK. A while ago, I wondered if the press still wanted what was best for America - I wondered it because they seem so resolutely unwilling to print a good word about anything - not the Katrina rescuers, not the troops in Iraq who are doing heroic work, nothing…it’s just “blastBushblastBushblastBush” all the time. Their hatred is in control of them. Very sad, very sick. If a Bill Clinton were hosting Talabani under these circumstances, the press would be slavishly, devotedly playing the story up…and you know what? I wouldn’t mind, because Clinton would have deserved it, and I would be SO PROUD of my country that it would simply be a moment of great joy. I am STILL proud of my country, and reading about this was a moment of great joy, but the joy was incomplete because the moment was so obscured by the machinations of the press. I try not to hate, but I am coming to despise the press as I never would have imagined I could. I am beginning to despise them because they have become all about destruction and division and deliberate distortion…they are no longer interested in simply reporting the news, they are about emoting and “framing” and spinning - they do not serve the craft of journalism, but the craftiness of political pretense. They are apparently more committed to being cosmopolitan “journalists first and Americans second” that they cannot bring themselves to - even for amoment - “build up” America when it is RIGHT to pat her on the back. They are actively earning my enmity. I’m not alone. The press is very quickly so destroying its credibility that when it begins to carry Hillary on its shoulders in 2007 (as it carried Kerry in 2004) they will discover fewer and fewer people willing to believe a word of their gushing praise for her. Gateway Pundit has more, interesting aspects to the story, and the GOOD NEWS that the press will not report. gatewaypundit.blogspot.com Joe at Joes’ Dartblog has more on Talabani and the press. dartblog.com theanchoressonline.com