Quote:
|
Originally Posted by matthew330
If every news and weather agency out there was so dead on and definitive, why was Bush's response necessary? If this was such common knowledge, why was there anyone remaining in the area?
Oh yeah, stupid me. It was only minorities who were too poor to afford TV's and radios and didn't have access to word of mouth who were killed, and a concious effort by the administration to keep this life saving information from them.
|
matthew,
I'm not sure why you feel the need to respond in such a manner. Why do you take criticisms of Bush so personally as to feel it necessary to resort to such replies? I'm not sure I understand where this ire is coming from.
I'm also a little unclear what your reply has to do with the topic at hand, which is: Bush is accused of lying about his being informed of the dangers of the levees failing. We could rehash the entire thread about why not everyone was evacuated, but I think it would just be easier to search for it and re-read it.
Recent information calls into question Bush's earlier statements regarding his ignorance of the dangers facing the residents of New Orleans. Many have stated that no one could have anticipated that. My reply was that the information was there. As the president, I'd expect him to be more aware of current events than me and if he is, then to be forthright about it. If you wish to discuss that, then we can. If, however, you wish to go off on a tangential tirade while simultaneously insulting and patronizing those with whom you disagree, then I believe you're in the wrong forum.