Strike the Set

Julian Sanchez | September 4, 2005

Kevin Drum's right: If this report is accurate, it's criminal.

There was a striking dicrepancy between the CNN International report on the Bush visit to the New Orleans disaster zone, yesterday, and reports of the same event by German TV.

ZDF News reported that the president's visit was a completely staged event. Their crew witnessed how the open air food distribution point Bush visited in front of the cameras was torn down immediately after the president and the herd of 'news people' had left and that others which were allegedly being set up were abandoned at the same time.

UPDATE: Jesse Walker forwards a link to more info.

Comments

M1EK|9.4.05 @ 1:39PM|#

CLINTON^H^H^H^H^H^HGORE^H^H^H^HKERRY WOULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!

|9.4.05 @ 1:53PM|#

I agree. Kerry would have been worse. Halfway through Kerry's staged event, the actor hired to play the dead body would get up and exit stage left.

|9.4.05 @ 2:16PM|#

I don't know if this report is true, but I do know that many of his other public appearances are heavily staged. I mean, how else do you get a demographically balanced audience to show up and gush about how they feel like God is back in the White House?

And yes, I know, other politicians stage their events too. Fine. Show me any politician whose staff sets up a food distribution center in a disaster area and then tears it down and I'll criticize him regardless of party.

So, I don't know if it's true, but we're talking about a bunch that has very little credibility on, well, anything. Maybe if they had done more to establish credibility with the American people we could dismiss this all as crazy talk.

|9.4.05 @ 2:29PM|#

imagine that, the public demands photo ops to be shown the president cares, and then complain that the president is doing photo ops. maybe it is all fake, and that would be a shame, but lets not pretend that a man flying to N.O. is all of a sudden gonna rescue people from rooftops and care for folks with diabetes. there is nothing the president can physically do there, but we demand he show up, what do you expect? perhaps we'll never know how many staged event there were in the past due to limited camera's, media, etc. not giving the gov a pass here, but really, did you want him to start pulling power lines? there was no point in even showing up, outside of some false sense of 'it will lift spirits'.

|9.4.05 @ 2:46PM|#

"there was no point in even showing up, outside of some false sense of 'it will lift spirits'."

I'm not sure about the "false sense part". There was a CNN reporter the other day that talked about how much everyone's spirits were lifted when Air Force One made a low pass over the city. Everyone talked about how they had felt so cut off from the rest of the world, and that the flyby reminded them that weren't being forgotten.

|9.4.05 @ 2:50PM|#

the public demands photo ops to be shown the president cares, and then complain that the president is doing photo ops.

No, the public demands action to be shown that the President cares, not Potemkin villages to continue the illusion that everything is fine. There's nothing wrong with setting up all that stuff for the President's visit; symbols are very powerful. But, setting it up and then taking it right down again as soon as everyone is gone is pretty fucking low, even for these people. In fact, I would say that it demonstrates pretty well how the only value those poor people have for the government is as photo opportunities

|9.4.05 @ 2:50PM|#

If the refugees are still refugees when Thanksgiving rolls around, perhaps Bush can feed them a tasty plastic turkey.

On a different note, I wonder if Fox News' Shepard Smith will still have his job when the hurricane coverage ends. Looks like his faith in this administration has crumbled like a storm-battered levee. I caught a few minutes of him on O'Reilly; I guess Bill was saying something like "You can't expect the government to help until they determine what help is needed," and Smith snapped, "On the first day, they needed food and water. On the second day, they needed food and water. On the third day, they needed food and water. On the fourth day, they needed food and water."

I hope they finally got some.

Uncle Sam|9.4.05 @ 2:52PM|#

Ah, the wonderful delusions of partisan politics.

|9.4.05 @ 2:57PM|#

I don't know what's wrong with me. I keep having the same reaction - Surely, nobody with try to defend THAT. And then someone like "hm" shows up, and tells me that the public "demanded" that helicopters, funds, and personnel be used to set up a fake relief shelter, tell people to go to it, then take it down.

Still don't know if the story's true, but I know, once again, that my naked partisanship is a pretty damn good compass.

|9.4.05 @ 2:58PM|#

Found, of all places, on Fox News.com. If I were religious I would view this, on top of the storm, as a sign that the Apocalypse is nigh:

Congress in recent years has abdicated its responsibility to ensure that the Executive Branch is doing its job effectively. There are people who will view any questions posed in the aftermath of Katrina as simply a partisan attack on the Bush administration. That is not the case, and it would be a disservice to our country for anyone to attempt to muzzle Congress at this time because the questions are being posed to a Republican president.

|9.4.05 @ 3:01PM|#

the public "demanded" that helicopters, funds, and personnel be used to set up a fake relief shelter, tell people to go to it, then take it down

Perhaps we didn't hear much about this because it was hidden by the liberal MSM?

|9.4.05 @ 3:19PM|#

I remember a time when conservatives never trusted anything the executive branch did and gave consideration to every allegation made against the President.

I don't know if this allegation is true. I wish we had a President sufficiently reputable that I could simply dismiss the allegation as crazy.

Sadly, we haven't had a trustworthy person in the White House since...um, somebody help me out here? Bush I? (maybe) Or Carter?

If it was indeed a TV set, I hope Craft Services at least fed some refugees.

|9.4.05 @ 3:19PM|#

And really, where is Karl-Eduard Von Schnizler where Gerhard needs him?

Perhaps someone should note the "if" part of Julian's post.

|9.4.05 @ 3:26PM|#

"... I wonder if Fox News' Shepard Smith will still have his job when the hurricane coverage ends."

Why?

"Found, of all places, on Fox News.com ... :"

Why "of all places"?

|9.4.05 @ 3:34PM|#

I think hm's point has some validity. It's not that Bush's stage management is defensible, it's that people need to stop demanding symbolic gestures of empathy in the face of a crisis. It's inconsistent to attack Bush for this incident while also attacking Condi for buying shoes, but we should resolve that inconsistency by defending Condi rather than Bush.

|9.4.05 @ 3:35PM|#

SP, considering Fox News' record of always holding this administration accountable for shortcomings, and asking it the hard questions, I can see why you're so puzzled by my shock.

|9.4.05 @ 3:37PM|#

Everybody says they don't believe what the MSM says. Who knows if this report is true or not.

In the end, everbody believes what the MSM says. Otherwise most of this thread so far wouldn't have been written.

"Bush is such a monster, I'll bet he eats babies for breakfast. That man is capable of anything." This sounds a bit like "racism", now merrily flaming in a nearby thread.

I'm sure you all will defend your reasons for believing what you do about Bush, and or __________ (fill in as you wish). But really, Bush, Gore, Kerry, Clinton? What's the difference? They're all scum in their own ways.

Bush is not my hero, but I sincerely doubt he eats babies for breakfast. The MSM puts out this story about Bush, and everybody joints the feeding frenzy because it's easier than facing the fact: the only presidents that can get elected anymore SUCK.

|9.4.05 @ 3:44PM|#

btw, the same goes for mayors, and govenors, and senators, and all that.

|9.4.05 @ 3:55PM|#

Kahn is right in that whether or not this Bush story is true, the entire government--Republican and Democrat both--fucked up big-time here. Here is something I found on Reuters:

"There is rapes going on here. Women cannot go to the bathroom without men. They are raping them and slitting their throats. They keep telling us the buses are coming but they never leave," she said through tears.

People here said there were now 22 bodies of adults and children stored inside the building, but troops guarding the building refused to confirm that and threatened to beat reporters seeking access to the makeshift morgue.

People trying to walk out are forced back at gunpoint - something troops said was for their own safety. "It's sad, but how far do you think they would get," one soldier said. . . .

"We found a young girl raped and killed in the bathroom," one National Guard soldier told Reuters. "Then the crowd got the man and they beat him to death."

Even if you buy into the argument that you can't expect emergency management to keep order in an emergency, that report of people being forced back at gunpoint needs to be investigated, and if it's true, those responsible need to have their figurative heads chopped off.

|9.4.05 @ 3:59PM|#

"We found a young girl raped and killed in the bathroom," one National Guard soldier told Reuters. "Then the crowd got the man and they beat him to death."

So much for the right of due process...

|9.4.05 @ 4:04PM|#

Kahn,
You have a distinct point. About everyone believing it, I mean.

|9.4.05 @ 4:07PM|#

Andy--

Yes, sounds like the National Guard was as incompetent at protected the alleged rapist as they were at protecting the alleged victim. Everything just fell apart.

M1EK|9.4.05 @ 4:25PM|#

"But really, Bush, Gore, Kerry, Clinton? What's the difference?"

False equation. "Murdering a city; going 5 miles over the limit? What's the difference?"

|9.4.05 @ 5:22PM|#

Media demands photo op. They get photo op. Media mad they got photo op.

There's really no point at all for nonemergency people to be going into these scenes. Especially a president since it demands so many resources that could instead be used to get the emergency under control. This applies to any president, although some presidents may botch it up more than others.

But we have to see the President out there, since he's a guy who's more powerful than God and we need to make sure he's on our side. And if this president doesn't appear to be more powerful than God, the problem is that we just haven't tried the right president yet. We all know that given the right president the hurricane would have passed by with little consequence and much fewer people would have died. Unfortunately, we haven't yet gotten that president, although I'm pretty sure that either Kerry, Gore, Dole, Perot, Dukakis, Mondale, etc. would have been perfect presidents.

|9.4.05 @ 5:32PM|#

Xavier writes: "I think hm's point has some validity. It's not that Bush's stage management is defensible, it's that people need to stop demanding symbolic gestures of empathy in the face of a crisis."

Um, the point is, there ought to be enough GENUINE things that Bush could have done. He doesn't need to get his hands dirty, he just needs to show up at a place where people are genuinely being helped. It's indefensible that they set up a fake relief station, which is not only dishonest, but it also used resources that are badly needed elsewhere at real relief efforts.

It's like if Bush had done his post-9/11 speech on top of a pile of rubble from a regular, planned demolition in Queens, instead of going to ground zero, and had pulled a bunch of people off the ground zero pile to act as extras in his photo op.

I suspect they had to set up a fake set because the real ones would have looked far worse. This way, they were able to control just who had access, and could keep out mobs of angry people who would be at the real relief stations.

|9.4.05 @ 5:54PM|#

Jon: Bringing in the president is an enormous logistical challenge. Security is a major challenge wherever the president goes. It's absolutely unavoidably impossible for the president to go anywhere that isn't carefully managed and without wasting a lot of resources that are better spent elsewhere. The choice is between a wasteful, phony show of empathy or not showing up at all. You're mistaken to believe that there is any middle ground.

|9.4.05 @ 6:02PM|#

An update to the "Bush stopped food from being delivered" part of the story:

http://tinyurl.com/e3tko



Air traffic not halted
Staff report
"The delay of three tons of food to residents stranded in St. Bernard Parish and Algiers Point on Friday was not because of air traffic restrictions because of President George W. Bush�s visit, but because of miscommunication between federal officials.

Casey O�Shea, the chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-Napoleonville, told the Times Picayune on Friday that the delivery of the food by helicopter to residents was halted because of limits placed on aircraft travel in the vicinity of President Bush. The food, which was secured by Melancon and state Agriculture Commissioner Bob Odom, was eventually delivered to residents, but only after sitting on the Crescent City Connection for hours.

In a written statement on Sunday, O�Shea said that he had been notified by the White House that there should not have been any restrictions on air travel. Kim Tate, the special agent in charge of the Secret Service�s New Orleans field office, said that not only was air travel not halted, but the Secret Service did not use any local first responders to provide security as it typically does.

"All I know is that at the time, I was told by folks at the EOC that air traffic was grounded. I have since been told by The White House this was not the case. Due to an apparent miscommunication, food and supplies unfortunately had to wait to reach people in desperate need," O�Shea said.

Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Roland Herwig said that air travel is typically restricted within 18,000 feet and 30 nautical miles of the president at all times, although military and some service crafts can receive special waivers to travel."

Ah yes, "miscommunication" in government. I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you.

|9.4.05 @ 6:09PM|#

"Casey O�Shea, the chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-Napoleonville, told the Times Picayune on Friday that the delivery of the food by helicopter to residents was halted because of limits placed on aircraft travel in the vicinity of President Bush. "

I'm shocked that people would say things like this without even knowing for sure if they're true .... almost as shocked as a whole thred spun from a single 3rd hand report on a German TV station.

But it would just blow me away if it turned out a *Democrat* was saying something about Bush that wasn't true ... that can't be ... certainly not knowingly!

|9.4.05 @ 6:17PM|#

Feh. More meaningless BS. The bottom line here is that the media - and apparently plenty of people on this board - are too intellectually lazy to look at the actual problems and suggest real solutions.

I just don't see why it's better to squeal about faked photo ops and shout "plastic turkey! Rawk!" than to simply acknowledge that a disaster of this magnitude is going to kill a lot of people and plenty will go through hell suriviving it and that the government will do a crap job of fixing it.

Why? How could this be avoided? It happened because natural disasters happen. How could this be avoided? It can't be without changing human nature and the nature of gov't along with it. The only thing to be done is hope like hell that we can learn from this "American Pompei."

Oh, and while we're at it, I think that Kahn has hit the nail on the head as far as he goes. I think the response we've seen from Bush 2 and his administration is about as good as it's going to get during ANY administration. The fact that we all think the response sucks is probably due to the fact that libertarians ALWAYS think the gov't sucks - and we're ALWAYS right.

But I think that libertarians tend to think that the current administration is the worst ever, no matter what 4-year term we're living through. That might be blinding us to the fact that there's no equivalent disaster to this one just like there was no precednet for 9/11 that made sense in a way that would allow the gov't to re-fight an early incident in a better way.

You can't expect any bureaucracy to pitch a perfect game the first time they play a game at a higher level than ever before. Bureaucracies fun ction by following a pre-established game plan. Once simply hasn't ever been played for stakes this high, against forces this dangerous and concentrated before.

To paraphrase someone else's argument, let's see if the team we've got can adapt and eventually overcome. 2 weeks is probably a good time frame for a federal response, let's give them that long and hope for the best. And hope that the bureaucracy learns how to handle this, so when something worse than 9/11 hits a truly major city, it gets handled far better.

Jeff Smith|9.4.05 @ 6:31PM|#

This whole thread is bizarre. Government is like Hollywood - all about form only about substance when it is necessary to the form - other than, of course, the substance of handing out goodies to small, well-organized groups.

Of course it was staged. They are always staged! Did you people just fall off the turnip truck, or what? Jeez.

And the German reporter being shocked (shocked!) that politicians would do this. What a load of crap. European politicians have even less shame than American ones, in part because Europeans are so much more credulous about government than Americans.

Really, the area inside the beltway is just a big bowl full of lies. I am so glad to be out of it.

Jeff

|9.4.05 @ 7:25PM|#

Anyone who doesn't realize that all parties do this worries me more than those who do it in the first place.

|9.4.05 @ 7:28PM|#

It'll be fun to see/hear Limbaugh and Hannity try to squirm their way out from under this one.

|9.4.05 @ 7:51PM|#

Is this a paraphrase of something I recall from military experiences in a prior life:
"The difficult we'll do immediately. The impossible may take a little longer. The photo-op may take even a bit longer than that."
Sorry about your luck.

|9.4.05 @ 8:43PM|#

Damn, they really showed up in force to spine irrelevancies here, didn't they?

Running scared.

|9.4.05 @ 8:48PM|#

1. They All Do This (retread of Nixon apologists)

2. You aren't thinking about what's REALLY important.

3. The White House said nuh-uh.

Pimp dadddy pimp daddy pimp daddy pimp daddy.

You people are pathetic.

|9.4.05 @ 8:49PM|#

So, I've said only 2 things about this:

1) I don't know if the report is credible, and so I await more facts.

2) If this President had done more to earn our trust I wouldn't even wait for more facts to come in, and instead I'd dismiss it as obviously ridiculous.

What do administration cheerleaders say? Well, they explain that even if this report is true it's really no big deal.

I await an explanation of how four legs are good and two legs are better.

|9.4.05 @ 8:58PM|#

4. The people making these charges are communist fags who order their cheesesteaks with swiss cheese.

|9.4.05 @ 9:18PM|#

joe,
Are you letting your hair down tonight?
For all I know, you're bald as a cueball.

Photo-ops imply the hoi polloi can't handle the truth, right?

|9.4.05 @ 10:19PM|#

I'd paraphrase joe's number four:

4) People who criticize the President are, by definition, wrong.

|9.4.05 @ 10:25PM|#

how else do you get a demographically balanced audience to show up and gush about how they feel like God is back in the White House?

Duh, it's a miracle! If God can part the waters of the Red Sea, could he not draw together, at a place of Bush's choosing, a crowd with all races proportionally represented?

Yet more proof of God's favor for his blessed servant Dubya! ;-)

|9.4.05 @ 10:38PM|#

Gotta love it.

First the leftists bitch that Bush doesn't care enough to show up in New Orleans. When he shows up they bitch that it's just a photo op. What the hell did you think he was going to do there, unload trucks?

He should have stayed back in Washington looking at resumes to replace "Brownie". He didn't have to be in the affected area to know that it was just a bit of mess and help better get there pretty damn fast.

As for the actual post that starts this thread, how much credibility do you really want to give a third hand description of a German TV station. Is thoreau the last sane person in this forum?

|9.4.05 @ 10:43PM|#

"4) People who criticize the President are, by definition, wrong."

No, they aren't; but people who instantly latch onto any 3rd hand account of criticism of the President, regardless of source, are not credible, even when they're right. And there are plainly such people right here on this thread.

If Bush actually staged this, it was wrong. No excuses. But, someone should *prove it* with something more than this nonsense.

For Christ's sake it's GERMAN TV! Consider the source, at least for a second.

Has/Is anyone here:

(1) Looked on Die Welt lately to see comments posted by folks about their press coverage of Katrina?

(2) Read Der Spiegel in the last 5 years?

(3) Aware of what German TV played all day during the last US election?

(4) Aware that Gerhard is fighting for his life? And what that meant last time?

(5) Read Anna Funder's "Stasiland" ?

(6) Aware that a very large portion of the German population also thinks 9-11 was "staged" (in a manner of speaking) by Bush?

(7) Aware that Dennis Kucinich could win an election for chancellor there if he was only German?

(8) Aware the Germany is the county of Goebbels, Leni, and Karl-Eduard?

If someone has more evidence, cite it and I'll withdraw my objections. Otherwise, this whole thing is horseshit.

|9.4.05 @ 10:45PM|#

(7) above is probably wrong; Dennis is too conservative for them.

|9.4.05 @ 10:51PM|#

"Is thoreau the last sane person in this forum?"

They're coming to take him away.
Hee hee. Hee ha.. Koochi koochi.

Twiddle dee on mockingboid hill.

Anybody else lookin' for sanity in all the wrong places?

|9.4.05 @ 10:55PM|#

Ruthless is definitely insane.

|9.4.05 @ 11:12PM|#

America,
If you had read "The Sorrows of Young Werther" by Goethe, you would understand.

Gusundheit. And Gueten Abend.

(All's Quiet on the Western Front wouldn't hurt either.)

Stille Nacht.

|9.4.05 @ 11:17PM|#

Or even just watched "Seig am der Wessen."

|9.5.05 @ 12:17AM|#

You can't expect any bureaucracy to pitch a perfect game the first time they play a game at a higher level than ever before. Bureaucracies fun ction by following a pre-established game plan.

Now that makes a lot of sense.

Too bad none of us is sane enough to appreciate it.

|9.5.05 @ 12:47AM|#

thoreau is sane enough to appreciate it

By the way the flavor of the day at Kopps is caramel cashew. Damn, I just realized they are already closed. Better look for a rotting corpse for a snack.

The Wine Commonsewer|9.5.05 @ 12:54AM|#

Andy,

Due process

Frankly if I was there and knew the truth I'd help kill the bastard. That's due process.

The Wine Commonsewer|9.5.05 @ 12:59AM|#

I am skeptical. Even GWB isn't this blatantly stupid (please tell me he's not). You can't even cover up whose boinking the boss in a mid-size office how could you ever cover up something this large?

|9.5.05 @ 1:13AM|#

Okay, call me a skeptic who doesn't speak German, but I watched the video referenced in the Blah3.com link (here: http://tinyurl.com/caz2g )up to the 7 minute point, which is after all the NO coverage as near as I can tell. Though I don't find the staged photo op charge implausible, nothing in the video supports the charges supposedly made by the reporter, which strikes me as odd since the existence of the report itself demonstrates that they had video equipment onsite.

|9.5.05 @ 1:58AM|#

The fact that we all think the response sucks is probably due to the fact that libertarians ALWAYS think the gov't sucks - and we're ALWAYS right.

We are right. The gov't does suck. Now, if we could only get everybody to listen to us.

Wait -- which one of us?

Only thoreau is sane enough.

thoreau, it's not the finite elements you have to fear, it's the people who program them (and don't tell you all their assumptions). Take it from someone who's been there.

|9.5.05 @ 3:33AM|#

Ah yes, those perfidious Germans! What won't they do to hurt the US! The Germans just hate George Bush so so much, that they will make up news reports in order to slander him.

Sorry, but no.

In fact, in the Germans don't really care that much about US politics to go to the trouble. True, the current US administration is none too popular here (a common trait throughout the world), but it's not so important a matter that anyones going to go out and make up stories about it. It's no longer the land of Goebbels -- the US made sure of that during the rebuilding in the 40s and 50s -- and there is a bit more to the German media than the english-language services of Die Welt and Der Speigel.

The Germans do know a thing or two about flooding and disaster relief (see Tsunami, Indonesia) however, and are awed by apparent inability of an incredibly wealthy first-world nation to get it's act together fast enough help it's own in a timely manner.

|9.5.05 @ 10:34AM|#

Ah yes, those perfidious Germans! What won't they do to hurt the US! The Germans just hate George Bush so so much, that they will make up news reports in order to slander him.

Sorry, but no.

Outright slander? No, you're right about that. So far, anyway.

But given a choice between reporting facts objectively or cherry-picking some out of context to reflect badly on Bush (who, it must be granted, helps them out a great deal here), the majority of the German media will choose the latter.

Sorry, but yes.

And judging by the past couple of dozen issues from Der Spiegel and Stern, the Germans media do care enough to stick it the US whenever they can.

|9.5.05 @ 10:35AM|#

"stick it TO the US", that is.

drf|9.5.05 @ 10:45AM|#

Wow. A "Germany Expert" is among us.

I dunno - GG has "lived" there. I've lived five years in Denmark (watched Tagesschau at 8 every night), have lived more than one year in Vienna... I read and watch Germanic Europe's news everday.

Disputing a missing link to a dubious story is one thing, but that litany against germany is another. From what I expereinced, what you're trying to say is silly.

Note that my reflex was also not to believe the ZDF report - i've been looking for other articles about this, too. But going off like that is silly. You poor silly boob.

"GERMAN TV! Consider the source, at least for a second."
okay - i've watched lots of it. I watch, at least sometimes, the news via the internet. What are you trying to say with that? How much do you watch. You have to back that point up - you demand proof at first, then you throw that out there. That sounds plain ol' silly.

Besides being unable to find the appropriate video at ZDF's site, I would equate the deliberate NPR bias with Fox with Tagesschau (certain "truths", i.e., global warming, welfare state, 1:1 mapping of the Bundestag's parties on Congress, etc). So, yes, there is huge bias in the Euro-press I experienced. However, I feel that NPR and Fox and some MSNBC shows do the same thing. (I don't believe in the "liberal media" bias, as I feel it is story-based).

I'd bet GG's experiences are also different from your obvious expert analysis.

Your expertise on Germany includes this wonderful section:
Ad Hominems and Irrelevant Comments!

"Read Der Spiegel in the last 5 years?"
ja eigentlich schon - ich habe aber mein Abonnement zur�ckgenommen - Profil, die �sterreichische Zeitschrift ist meiner Meinung nach, genau so Eurozentrisch (etwa "the Economist") darum mag ich diese schrecklichen Drei gar nicht. Was willst damit sagen?

"Aware the Germany is the county of Goebbels, Leni, and Karl-Eduard?"

Ach - wie der Schriftsteller Karl Kraus einmal ge�ussert hat: "Deutschland ist das Land des Dichters und Denkers sowie des Richters und des Henkers"
Meinst wirklich-- Das Land tr�gt die Schuld seines Vaters und Urgrossvaters. Verstehe. Und was k�nnen wir den USA wg. dem KKK usw vorw�rfen???? (Das beweist sehr viel. Leider nur eine andere Tatsache, n�mlich dass Du gar keine Ahnung hast)

Besides some german baiting going on there, there's no real gray matter being used. Some third and fourth hand criticism and the all-time favorite (ad hominem on Germany) fallacy are being used, instead.

Where is the link to the ZDF story/video? I've searched the site - Tagesschau doesn't mention it. The ZDF page didn't mention it. Various newspapers didn't mention it. How about focusing on that? You're proving Jennifer right there, my silly man.

"Dennis is too conservative for them." care to prove this? do you know who Edmund Stoiber is? what about Helmut Kohl? That is a plain silly comment. Plain silly. You're now entered in the "Great Boob off" against Pamela Anderson and Dolly Parton (era 1970s).

Notice the difference: searching for the confirmation instead of saying "oh, it's Germany". Instead of debating the points, throwing out brilliant analysis on how DK is too "conservative" for the Germans.

I think that reflex is exactly what Jennifer means in # 4. I don't know and don't care if your objection is in defense of the President, if you don't like that form of argumentation (although your "hey, it's germany" comments belie that sentiment), or what. It's just plain silly saying that.

Do you share the Fox news induced hatred of France, too? Do you, um, boycott french wines? Are you making a "statement" with that? oooh. Are you one of those internet tough guys who always challenge Frank Shamrock or Chuck Lidell? Can you show us your bicept? Or is clown school your limit?

Erst denken, dann schreiben. Jetzt hau' Di iwa de Heisr, Du Heislratz.

|9.5.05 @ 10:57AM|#

Jetzt hau' Di iwa de Heisr, Du Heislratz.

Leever Jott! Du hast aber eindeutig zuviel Zeit in Wien verbracht.

|9.5.05 @ 12:01PM|#

"You have to back that point up - you demand proof at first, then you throw that out there."

You've missed the point entirely. No proof is necessary is these kinds of discussions; if it was they'd never get started in the first place.

On the other hand (if we're all going to argue about angels standing on heads of pins), the style of German media coverage, German public opinion, and the influence of German politics on its media coverage are absolutely relevant to German media reports about Bush.

In between bashing me, exactly what are you disputing in (1), (2), (3), (4), (6) above?

I'll give you (7) - random guess about Denny.

Tim Cavanaugh|9.5.05 @ 12:19PM|#

Staged or not, could anything be less inspiring than watching the President walk around with his sleeves rolled up, shaking hands like he's at a Home Depot?

|9.5.05 @ 12:24PM|#

"Notice the difference: searching for the confirmation instead of saying "oh, it's Germany". "

It would be really nice if people "noticed" that "difference" when the last word was "Bush"

|9.5.05 @ 1:06PM|#

Wow. joe's really showing his true colors on this particular thread. Every once in a while he comes out with something that shows just what he REALLY thinks and feels about the people who post here: "You people are pathetic."

No, joe, I would say that a guy who goes to party specifically to insult everyone there is pathetic. You do the equivalent of that at least once a week in this forum.

As for the whole "Blame Germany" bit, I certainly don't think that Germany or any first-world country's journalists have the market cornered on irresponsible "reporting." But Euro-journalism does tend to be considerably more sensationalistic and tabloid-ish. I don't even need to read or write German to know that, since my hall-mate (and fellow journalism major) in college used to regularly translate it for us. (He grew up behind the Wall, and was fluent in Russian, German and English.)

|9.5.05 @ 1:20PM|#

On the first day they needed food, water and local leadership. On the second day they needed food, water and local leadership. On the third day, etc.
At least, now, they have food and water.

|9.5.05 @ 3:59PM|#

"Staged or not, could anything be less inspiring than watching the President walk around with his sleeves rolled up, shaking hands like he's at a Home Depot?"

How about a little guy with a big head in a tank?

rob, I don't think libertarians as a whole are pathetic. If I didn't I wouldn't bother arguing with them. I certainly don't waste my time having back and forths with Freepers.

No, my point was that people making up excuses for the deadly dereliction of duty we've seen over the past week are pathetic.

|9.5.05 @ 5:23PM|#

joe, ok, I'll go along with that. But very few people on this board are fans of Bush - or gov't at all, for that matter.

On the other hand, I think that expecting "the federales" to swoop in and save people is a pretty far-fetched expectation.

The fact that it's so tough for the Feds to do this for any number of reasons that have nothing to do with dereliction of duty or irresponsibility seems like an object lesson in why it's important that state gov't exists, why the Nat'l Guard is under the command of the state governor, and so forth. The fact that the state gov't is filled with incompetents and crooks isn't much of a surprise to me, since I'm originally from very near New Orleans.

But like I've said plenty of times before, the approach of laying blame at the feet of federal gov't seems pretty weird to me. Especially since it's usually an accepted part of a disaster plan that the locals will handle things for the first couple weeks while the Feds get their logistics in order and their people and equipment on the ground.

Expecting a by the numbers emergency response in Louisiana from the Feds is like expecting the Papa John's in Bangor, Maine to deliver your pizza hot and fresh to your home in Paris, Texas.

I find it hard to see how even a liberal can honestly lay all the blame for this on the Feds/Bush - as tho they were actually an organization with unlimited power and resources. Thank God, Allah, Buddha or whichever the deity of your choice that the Feds AREN'T all-powerful.

That's that whole democratic republic system, that places a check on federal power, and means that States should expect to handle their own crises as best they can while the Feds figure out how to do their part. I realize there are people who'd like to cede all power and resources to the federal gov't, but they're just as "pathetc" as the folks who think we can do away with the gov't as a whole.

|9.5.05 @ 7:25PM|#

but really, did you want him to start pulling power lines? there was no point in even showing up, outside of some false sense of 'it will lift spirits'.

I think that it's worse than that. He shows up and now needs extra security. Personnel must be diverted from whatever they are doing in the area.

|9.5.05 @ 7:29PM|#

but the Secret Service did not use any local first responders to provide security as it typically does.

I stand corrected.

|9.5.05 @ 11:40PM|#

I have a hard time following the whole state v. fed responsibility issue.

In my world NO would be responsible for its own evacuation plans, maintaining its own levees, providing its own government and so forth....

Unfortunately we don't live in that world. We live in the one where N.O. takes care of some levees and the feds take care of others. We live in a world where FEMA's existence creates the expectation that it can do something in cases like this. We live in a world where Dept of Homeland Security is supposed to sweep in after a man made disaster, but is impotent against a natural one. The federal government, and Bush since he's the unlucky head, is up to its elbows in NO. It's too late to claim that NO or anywhere else can't expect to rely on the government they've been paying taxes to.

It's good Bush is in charge, because without God in the Whitehouse things would really have gotten out of hand. That's a little unfair. None of this is his fault, but that's really a sad excuse for a leader.

|9.6.05 @ 1:40AM|#

So, has anyone actually come up with any corraboration or debunking of the story, or is everyone still arguing on fumes?

|9.6.05 @ 2:51AM|#

.5b,

America is much more energy efficient than it used to be. We can go a loooongggg way on fumes.

It looks like there've actually been some attempts to check the story, but the verdict doesn't seem to be conclusive.

I didn't find much in English to add to the pile when I looked, and my foreign German ain't so good.

|9.6.05 @ 8:37AM|#

I don't think much of Bush, but I don't understand the point of dismantling these food distribution stations. What for? Sadism?

As a rule of thumb, if something seems outrageously senseless I wait until there's some corroboration (even though I know that outrageously senseless things happen from time to time).

|9.16.05 @ 3:06PM|#

Probably because it was getting late, and you usually don't staff them all night, maybe?