Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   More Proof this Administration is stupid (Re: The FEMA press conference)
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 16 of 35 (431244)
10-30-2007 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by nator
10-29-2007 7:14 AM


Re: A Challenge for Bush Supporters
nator writes:
quote:
Bush created an enormous ocean preserve in the Hawaiian islands.
Not so fast there.
First, the nitpick: Just to people know the place we're talking about, the National Monument is the stretch of ocean between the main Hawaiian Islands and the Midway Atoll or thereabouts. It is roughly the size of California in area.
Second, the details: Bush did this under the American Antiquities Act of 1906 rather than the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. By declaring it a National Monument rather than a Marine Sanctuary, there aren't any real penalties for violating it and the executive can make any declaration regarding its use as desired.
Marine Sanctuaries, on the other hand, are run by the Secretary of Commerce with fines up to $120,000 per day per violation.
In short, Bush declared a protected area he doesn't have to actually protect.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by nator, posted 10-29-2007 7:14 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by nator, posted 10-30-2007 7:49 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 17 of 35 (431257)
10-30-2007 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Rrhain
10-30-2007 4:18 AM


Re: A Challenge for Bush Supporters
Oh well.
I tried.
I really tried.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Rrhain, posted 10-30-2007 4:18 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 35 (431382)
10-30-2007 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by jar
10-27-2007 5:06 PM


Tying it to Bush Administration?
FEMA held a press conference to address the California Wild Fires. Since no reporters showed up (either because FEMA didn't give anyone enough notice or perhaps simply because everyone knows it is impossible to believe anything FEMA claims), FEMA had some of their employees pretend to be reporters and ask questions during the conference.
The stunt pulled by members of FEMA was disgraceful and manipulative to be sure. However, what does that have to do with the Bush Administration when its a completely separate entity?
Grouping everyone in the FedGov would mean that somebody like Pelosi or Sen. Kennedy are actually in collaboration with the Bush Administration, which obviously is not the case.
About the only way to bring back on the Bush Administration's head is if they had ordered that representatives of FEMA concoct some scheme to hold their own fake news conference.

“This life’s dim windows of the soul, distorts the heavens from pole to pole, and goads you to believe a lie, when you see with and not through the eye.” -William Blake

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by jar, posted 10-27-2007 5:06 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 10-30-2007 8:19 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 20 by nator, posted 10-30-2007 8:21 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 26 by Rrhain, posted 11-02-2007 12:14 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 19 of 35 (431387)
10-30-2007 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Hyroglyphx
10-30-2007 8:09 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
The stunt pulled by members of FEMA was disgraceful and manipulative to be sure. However, what does that have to do with the Bush Administration when its a completely separate entity?
LOL
Oh yeah, sure. FEMA is not part of the Exectuive. Right.
Grouping everyone in the FedGov would mean that somebody like Pelosi or Sen. Kennedy are actually in collaboration with the Bush Administration, which obviously is not the case.
Classic example of silly reasoning and willful ignorance.
In case you hadn't noticed the Government is split into three sectors, Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Pelosi and Sen. Kennedy just happen to be in the Legislative Branch. FEMA is part of the Executive.
It is the President that sets the tone for stuff like FEMA and for redacting reports as pointed out in On Edits and redaction and denying reality by the Administration

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 8:09 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 9:19 PM jar has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 20 of 35 (431388)
10-30-2007 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Hyroglyphx
10-30-2007 8:09 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
quote:
However, what does that have to do with the Bush Administration when its a completely separate entity?
Er, who appoints the head of FEMA, therefore being the head of FEMA's boss?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 8:09 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 35 (431399)
10-30-2007 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
10-30-2007 8:19 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
Oh yeah, sure. FEMA is not part of the Exectuive. Right.
What is that supposed to prove, Jar? I'm part of the Executive government. Do you really think that I or my bosses have immediate ties with the White House? There is a chain of command a mile long before anything gets to the President or those in his cabinet.
Secondly, FEMA, like almost any other government agency, is divided in to sectors. It is possible that the parent command in Washington had absolutely no idea the yahoo's covering the California fires had prior knowledge of what would transpire.
Classic example of silly reasoning and willful ignorance.
On your part apparently, because the US Government is deep, delegating authority which delegates authority to someone else, who delegates authority to someone else, so on and so forth.
It is the President that sets the tone for stuff like FEMA and for redacting reports as pointed out in Thread On Edits and redaction and denying reality by the Administration
Sets the tone? What does that even mean? A president and his Administration sets in motion a government agency with laws and codes of conduct. I can guarantee that nowhere in the FEMA manuals is a mandate to feign press conferences. And if you think some executive order was given, by President Bush, please provide evidence. Otherwise, admit that its unadulterated speculation on your part, fed by your hatred for all things Bush.

“This life’s dim windows of the soul, distorts the heavens from pole to pole, and goads you to believe a lie, when you see with and not through the eye.” -William Blake

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 10-30-2007 8:19 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by jar, posted 10-30-2007 9:45 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 23 by crashfrog, posted 10-30-2007 9:57 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 27 by Rrhain, posted 11-02-2007 12:44 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 22 of 35 (431405)
10-30-2007 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Hyroglyphx
10-30-2007 9:19 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
What is that supposed to prove, Jar? I'm part of the Executive government. Do you really think that I or my bosses have immediate ties with the White House?
No, but the Military is a separate example of the stupidity of this Administration.
FEMA though is not the Military, and the employees of FEMA do seem to follow policy as directed by the Administration.
Do you have ay other explanation for the continuing failure of this Administration?
Can you point to any examples of behavior for this Administration other than utter stupidity?
And if you think some executive order was given, by President Bush, please provide evidence. Otherwise, admit that its unadulterated speculation on your part, fed by your hatred for all things Bush.
Oh, I don't think this Administration is really bright enough to actually plan something, anything. They are simply incompetent from top to bottom.
It is a case of sixes and nines. People that are exceptional, nines, tend to hire folk that are as good or even better than themselves. The mediocre, the sixes, tend to hire those who are less competent than themselves, certainly never higher anyone more competent.
This Administration aspires to become a six.
It is not a matter of my hating Bush, that gives him too much credit. It is the consequences of looking at the output, the production, the behavior of this Administration.
If you believe I am wrong, then support the behavior of this Administration other than simply whining. I presented a specific example. It is yet another example of how stupid this Administration is. It is fact. It happened.
You disagree? Then support your position. Show us examples of other than stupidity by this Administration.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 9:19 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-31-2007 1:17 AM jar has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 23 of 35 (431407)
10-30-2007 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Hyroglyphx
10-30-2007 9:19 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
A president and his Administration sets in motion a government agency with laws and codes of conduct. I can guarantee that nowhere in the FEMA manuals is a mandate to feign press conferences.
Yeah, you're absolutely right, NJ. I mean, holding a fake press conference? That's certainly a radical departure from the honesty, transparency, and aboveboard conduct that this administration has developed the reputation for, isn't it?
It's a culture of corruption, NJ, led by an executive and his administration displaying a complete disregard for truth and oversight, and rewarding slavish loyalty. How many examples do we have to supply? "Heckuva job, Brownie"? Scooter's pardon? How can any thinking person, at this point, not see this latest travesty as a direct result of the example set by the President? Explain it to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 9:19 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-02-2007 11:13 PM crashfrog has replied

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 35 (431425)
10-31-2007 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by jar
10-30-2007 9:45 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
No, but the Military is a separate example of the stupidity of this Administration.
And WTF is that supposed to mean?
-x

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact ” which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by jar, posted 10-30-2007 9:45 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by jar, posted 10-31-2007 9:40 AM EighteenDelta has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 25 of 35 (431481)
10-31-2007 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by EighteenDelta
10-31-2007 1:17 AM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
This Administration has placed the military is an absolutely untenable position and designated them for tasks where they are assured of failure.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-31-2007 1:17 AM EighteenDelta has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Rrhain, posted 11-02-2007 12:48 AM jar has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 26 of 35 (431777)
11-02-2007 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Hyroglyphx
10-30-2007 8:09 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
Nemesis Juggernaut writes:
quote:
The stunt pulled by members of FEMA was disgraceful and manipulative to be sure. However, what does that have to do with the Bush Administration when its a completely separate entity?
(*blink!*)
You did not just say that, did you?
Um, NJ? What do you think the "F" in "FEMA" stands for? That's right: Federal. That means it is run by the Executive branch just like the FCC, FTC, FDA, and all those other little TLA's that begin with F. That means the Administration is the one who appoints the head of the department. And what is the criteria used? Whether or not he will support the President's agenda.
Why on earth do you think Michael Brown was appointed head of FEMA? Do you seriously not know Brown's ties to Bush before he was appointed head of FEMA? Do you seriously not understand why one-third of the entire FEMA staff resigned when Bush came into office?
FEMA used to be one the model organizations for disaster response in the world. Then Bush came in and got rid of everybody who had any experience regarding same in order to put his buddies into those positions so that they could then do what conservatives have been trying to do for decades: Privatize everything. The head of FEMA used to be reserved for career employees...under Bush, it became a political employee and he gave the job to a lobbyist. The chief of staff used to be someone with over 20 years experience...replaced by Bush's advance man.
And look what happened. FEMA is now a disaster.
Do you really think that the Bush administration had nothing to do with setting the marching orders of FEMA?
Please don't be disingenuous and say that you're just indicating that you don't believe Bush personally called up Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson to tell him to have a fake news conference. Nobody is saying he did.
Instead, we're pointing out that the Bush administration certainly advocated a culture of hostility to the press to the point of fraud. Again, have you forgotten about the fake news reports regarding NCLB and the Medicare prescription drug expansion? Have you forgotten about Gannon/Guckert? Over and over again we have caught the Bush administration in putting out fake news and each time, they said that they were shocked (SHOCKED, I tell you!) that such would happen and that they would make sure it never happened again.
So why on earth did Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson (and what's a Navy guy doing in the post of deputy director rather than a career FEMA employee?) get the idea that holding a fake news conference would be a good idea?
quote:
Grouping everyone in the FedGov would mean that somebody like Pelosi or Sen. Kennedy are actually in collaboration with the Bush Administration, which obviously is not the case.
(*blink!*)
You did not just say that, did you?
Do you seriously not understand the difference between the Legislature and the Executive?
Congress has the power to create funding for federal agencies. It has no power to actually run them beyond their "advice and consent" role in the appointment of the heads...which, by the way, the Bush administration does their damnedest to avoid through the use of recess appointments (Bolton, Troy, etc.)
No, it is the Executive that runs the departments and sets policy.
quote:
About the only way to bring back on the Bush Administration's head is if they had ordered that representatives of FEMA concoct some scheme to hold their own fake news conference.
Now, didn't I just ask you not to be disingenuous?
A very serious question. I really want to know the answer to this. If you reply to this message at all, it's the only thing I really want to know:
Do you think we're stupid?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 8:09 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 27 of 35 (431782)
11-02-2007 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Hyroglyphx
10-30-2007 9:19 PM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
Nemesis Juggernaut writes:
quote:
What is that supposed to prove, Jar? I'm part of the Executive government. Do you really think that I or my bosses have immediate ties with the White House?
(*blink!*)
You did not just say that, did you?
Are you seriously claiming that the Chiefs of Staff have nothing to do with the White House?
Let's not be disingenous and claim that you're simply pointing out that you don't believe Bush called Johnson to say, "Hold a fake news conference."
quote:
Secondly, FEMA, like almost any other government agency, is divided in to sectors. It is possible that the parent command in Washington had absolutely no idea the yahoo's covering the California fires had prior knowledge of what would transpire.
(*blink!*)
You did not just say that, did you?
Do you truly not know who Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson is? He's the deputy director of FEMA. The #2 man.
And did he get fired? No, of course not. The PR guy did. The #2 man at FEMA is told to run a fake news conference and he goes along with it? And nothing happens to him when it's found out? When the Bush administration has a long history of fake news reports?
quote:
Sets the tone? What does that even mean?
(*blink!*)
You did not just say that, did you?
Are you saying you have never heard of a "political appointment"? Are you saying you truly do not know that the top staff of FEMA used to be pulled from within FEMA. Under Bush, they became political appointees.
quote:
A president and his Administration sets in motion a government agency with laws and codes of conduct.
Indeed. And what codes of conduct has the Bush administration set in motion?
Privatize. Lie to the press. Have you forgotten Gannon/Guckert, Ryan, Garcia, Armstrong, etc.? Do you not know about the Pentagon Office of Strategic Influence? Have you forgotten that all during the 2004 election campaign, not a single person was allowed at any of Bush's "town hall" meetings that hadn't been personally vetted and screened?
quote:
I can guarantee that nowhere in the FEMA manuals is a mandate to feign press conferences.
So where on earth would FEMA's #2 man, Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson, get the idea to go along with a fake press conference when, being so close to the White House, he would know just how bad it would be for the administration to be tied YET AGAIN to a fake press report? Where on earth would he get the idea to go along with a fake press conference when FEMA was already under fire for the complete failure of Katrina?
quote:
And if you think some executive order was given, by President Bush, please provide evidence.
Now, didn't I ask you not to be disingenuous?
Nobody here is saying Bush called Vice Adm. Johnson. He didn't have to. It was already well established policy. The administration has a long history of fake press announcements. Why on earth is anybody surprised that FEMA would be in on it, too?
quote:
Otherwise, admit that its unadulterated speculation on your part, fed by your hatred for all things Bush.
Logical error: False dichotomy.
Just because Bush didn't pick up the phone and personally order the fake press conference doesn't mean the Bush administration wasn't involved.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-30-2007 9:19 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 28 of 35 (431783)
11-02-2007 12:48 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by jar
10-31-2007 9:40 AM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
jar writes:
quote:
This Administration has placed the military is an absolutely untenable position and designated them for tasks where they are assured of failure.
You only went halfway. Then, after failing in their doomed mission, the administration then blames the military for that failure, cuts their benefits, and leaves them to rot after avoiding their corpses when they come home.
And this is supposed to be the "pro-military" presidency.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by jar, posted 10-31-2007 9:40 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 11-02-2007 10:34 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 29 of 35 (431829)
11-02-2007 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Rrhain
11-02-2007 12:48 AM


Re: Tying it to Bush Administration?
There is yet another related example.
If there is ever to be a solution in Iraq that leaves a Nation State that is functional, it cannot be through Military action, but rather only through Diplomacy. However, the situation in Iraq caused by the misuse and misapplication of our military has left a state where it is so dangerous, so unstable, that Diplomats fear to be assigned to the are. It has become so bad that the State Department (Yes NJ, State is part of the Administration too) has had to tell folk that they will be assigned to serve in Iraq under threat of being fired.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Rrhain, posted 11-02-2007 12:48 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 30 of 35 (431925)
11-02-2007 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by jar
10-29-2007 8:58 AM


Re: Purposeful ineptness?
jar writes:
I might agree if it was an isolated incident instead of been yet another example of what appears to be pervasive and ubiquitous behavior.
I back down. I didn't look up your link yet, but I did look up rrhains. It is not an isolated incident. Very sad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 10-29-2007 8:58 AM jar has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024