0
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

 
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 12:37 am
Interesting and uneasy mix of joined-up writing and clunky capitals.

But no spelling mistakes as far as I can see....
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 05:59 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
timberlandko wrote:
Deja vu all over again ...


At the time I posted that, it was published in the (conservative) papers Tiemes, Telegraph and Scotsman - and still on reuters official photo site.
....


Well in today's printed version of the TIMES and (still) in it's online version, we find the following:

Quote:
September 16, 2005

http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,228749,00.jpg
An urgent matter of state as President Bush passes his note to Condoleezza Rice in the UN Security Council chamber (JUSTIN LANE / EPA)


Please Miss, may the US President be excused from the room?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 08:11 am
That Walter should be graphic proof, if nothing else is proof, that the mainstream press is made up of people who neither research nor even gather their own information--they see something they wish they had written so they rewrite it and present it as their own.

And then they're caught in a scam and every single one of them should own up to their own deceptive techniques. And it should be graphic illustration that EVERY news story must be held suspect by such non-reporters posing as journalists.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 08:12 am
Addendum to previous post: The tragic part of all that is you have dozens of writers reporting the same erroneous information, it is then copied and pasted all over the internet thus convincing those who do not have a healthy skepticism aobut it all that it is all true.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 08:15 am
Well, as said - I waited until this was in the conservative press.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 08:20 am
I don't care who put it out there. Those who are trying to use it to make the President look foolish should be ashamed of themselves.

On the other hand, Presidents do have to go just like everybody else. Having been in such uncomfortable circumstances where it was awkward to have to excuse myself, I can appreciate how it could happen. I do wonder if even the Presidential bladder is of such monumental importance that it is newsworthy and needs to be plastered everywhere by the media.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 08:22 am
Even if it was true, I don't see what the big deal is.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 08:47 am
Foxfyre wrote:
That Walter should be graphic proof, if nothing else is proof, that the mainstream press is made up of people who neither research nor even gather their own information--they see something they wish they had written so they rewrite it and present it as their own.

And then they're caught in a scam and every single one of them should own up to their own deceptive techniques. And it should be graphic illustration that EVERY news story must be held suspect by such non-reporters posing as journalists.


Seems genuine enough.

And your remark reminds me of the conservative press/commentators on the "2000 buses" fiasco.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:09 am
Well the mayor of New Orleans conceded that the busses were not used because he couldn't get drivers. I heard him say that himself, so that wasn't journalistic trolling.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:09 am
Both sides are taking this issue too seriously. My god, people, what'sa matter with you? We all have to go to the toilet, and sometimes at inopportune times. Can we drop this silly issue?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:12 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Well the mayor of New Orleans conceded that the busses were not used because he couldn't get drivers. I heard him say that himself, so that wasn't journalistic trolling.


No, he said it was hard to find drivers but did not say that the buses weren't used. The times-picayune archives indicate that buses were used to take passengers to the superdome.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:15 am
He made many comments re the busses because he was asked many time about the busses. Yes, some busses were used to take people to the Superdome. But he said they were not used to take people out of town and out of harm's way because 'all the drivers had fled the hurricane'.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:17 am
He also said that the plan's reference to "out of harm's way" meant to shelters and not out of town. If the buses had gone out of town they would have picked up a lot fewer people in the time they had. The red cross actually commends the decision to take them to the superdome. So I think we can all put the buses issue to bed now.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:17 am
What utter nonsense. The "Times of London" ran 3 separate articles about this?

Quote:
Reuters Says Bush Photo Not 'Malicious,' Reports Wide Interest at Home and Abroad

By E&P Staff

Published: September 15, 2005 4:30 PM ET updated 11:30 PM

NEW YORK With confirmation that an accidental photo of President Bush at the United Nations on Wednesday, writing a note to Secretary of State Condeezza Rice about a "bathroom break," was indeed real, newspapers around the U.S. and abroad are now planning to run it widely. But many, it seems, will treat it as something more than a joke.

A source at the Washington Post tells E&P that the paper is considering it for prominent play, in the context that, at least in some minds, it raises questions about overall perception of the U.S. at the United Nations, right or wrong. Reuters reports extremely strong interest in the photo today.

The fact is, according to Reuters -- and this has not been widely reported -- President Bush did indeed take a bathroom break after passing the note to Rice.

This apparently raised some eyebrows around the room, because American representatives (among others) have a reputation for suddenly bolting, though normally for a far different reason than this latest one. Fair or not, the European press has already had a field day with the photo, often centering on the notion that Bush had to ask Rice for permission.

The Times of London, for example, ran no less than three separate articles about it on its Web site, one at the top of its front page. (It's a Murdoch paper.) One headline reads: "Excuse me Condi, can I go to the bathroom?" Another story, believe it or not, opens: "The need to relieve oneself diplomatically has on occasion determined the fate of nations." The third discusses the sordid history of the particulatar lavatory in question, and contains this passage: "Medical experts said that the 59-year-old President was wise not to wait any longer."

The headline at the BBC news site suggested that Bush had been "caught short" at the U.N. summit. From The Sun: "I fear a leak, Condi." The Irish Examiner headline? "To Pee or Not to Pee, That is the Question." Der Spiegel in Germany translated "a bathroom break" as "eine Toiletten-Pause."

And, of course, it made The Daily Show back in the U.S. late Thursday night. On Friday morning, Newsday chortled: "Photographer leaks Bush potty idea." The Minneapolis Star-Tribune headlined: "Bush note inspires bathroom humor."

Gary Hershorn, news editor-photos for the Americas at Reuters, told E&P today that the photographer, Rick Wilking, informed him yesterday afternoon that he had observed Bush pass the note to Rice, and a little later, rise from his seat, leave the room, and then return.

And while some have suggested that Wilking, a well-known photographer just back from taking some of the most gripping images in New Orleans, was out to embarrass the president, Hershorn said that the photojournalist had no idea what Bush was writing on the paper. Wilking assumed the president was taking notes on what some other official was saying.

"Rick had no idea what he was shooting, or what Bush was writing," Hershorn said. "If Rick knew what he was writing we'd have 25 pictures of this, not two."

The photo was taken at 12:08 p.m. and it was Hershorn, about three hours later, who took the trouble to examine the photo closely. It was only then that he noticed the writing and decided to put it on the wire after 4:00.

The photo, as E&P observed Wednesday night in the first story about the incident, shows Bush scribbling in pencil on a note that already holds the words: "I think I may need a bathroom break? Is this possible." Wilking is a veteran Washington photographer who has long covered Bush campaigns and the White House.

As for transmitting the photo, Hershorn says, "There was no malicious intent. That's not what we do."

There's a simple explanation, even a serious one, for all of this, he adds. Bush, he points out, is not used to attending meetings at the U.N. and probably did not know what the protocol was for exiting a room and returning. His question to Rice was "proper" and not all that surprising, "asking someone with more experience there about protocol," he said.


(Edit: I see Walter had already posted a link to this article.)
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:18 am
I can agree with that second bolded statement.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:34 am
Quote:
I don't care who put it out there. Those who are trying to use it to make the President look foolish should be ashamed of themselves.


Nah. Making rulers and others in authority look foolish is a civic duty.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:36 am
Interesting -- British newspapers, right and left alike, consider it news that the American president sometimes goes to the bathroom. My British friends must be worse informed than I thought.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:43 am
Thomas wrote:
Interesting -- British newspapers, right and left alike, consider it news that the American president sometimes goes to the bathroom. My British friends must be worse informed than I thought.


Well, it has been reported all over the world - by any media connected to reuters-USA I suppose.

(And: 'Loo'/toilet that's what the British wrote :wink: )
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:48 am
What I find interesting is that in his fifth year as President he doesn't know protocol because he "isn't used to attending UN meetings. "
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Sep, 2005 09:50 am
kelticwizard wrote:
[
What bunk. FEMA does not require permission from the governor. It is Federally funded,and needs no permission from any state government to do what Congress funded it to do-save lives, commence rescue operations, and so much more.

Because Governor Blanco did not agree for the Federal government to take over the entire city of New Orleans before the storm hit, the Bush supporters are maintaining that the Feds could only sit idly by and watch it happen.

Another variation on this theme is that FEMA "are not first responders".

This is completely false.


This statement is incorrect in virtually every particular. The law is very clear on FEMA's role and the limits of the powers of the Federal government in local matters. It is useful to accompany one's indignation with some factual knowledge of the subject at hand.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 07/23/2025 at 03:29:20