Barbara Bush Blunders [Archive]

yesdachi

09-07-2005, 14:56

I really like her. She seems like a really good-hearted person but she is old and at least a step outside of reality compared to the evacuated people. Plus she is old. I have the perfect pie-baking grandma who loves everyone but every once in a while she will say something that sounds totally wrong but she meant it in the nicest way. I forgive her because she is old (and bakes pies ~D ).

I try to consider the source and judge accordingly. If it was the head of FEMA or the president it would be a different story but it is the countries grandma and although that doesn’t excuse the remark I consider the source and dismiss the inappropriateness of it.

Is she probably right? Maybe. :embarassed:

Should she have said it? Nope.

Adrian II

09-07-2005, 15:22

I think she just expressed her hope that things might indeed turn out for the best for these people. Clouds with silver linings, that sort of stuff. If her remarks are blown up this way, it just shows what low levels the bickering and recriminations have touched over the past week.

doc_bean

09-07-2005, 16:13

I don't think she meant it as evil as it sounds. ~:eek:

Goofball

09-07-2005, 16:31

"Let them eat cake."

Petrus

09-07-2005, 16:33

This new makes me think to a French queen, Marie-Antoinette in 1789 that is supposed to have asked, about the crowd that was asking for bread under the windows of her palace “They don’t have bread? Then why don’t they eat cake?”. A few days latter the revolution started and a few years latter she was condemned to death – for completely different reasons- and beheaded.

In those two cases, it seems it can be shortened as ‘Do those people really exist and why do they live like this?’

I find this even worst than if she had expressed contempt.

t1master

09-07-2005, 16:36

more race baiting by the media...

it's not news worthy, who cares what an eighty year old plus former first lady thinks, she don't make policy.

Petrus

09-07-2005, 16:42

more race baiting by the media...

it's not news worthy, who cares what an eighty year old plus former first lady thinks, she don't make policy.

I agree.

But it still shocks in the heat of the circumstances.

yesdachi

09-07-2005, 16:56

more race baiting by the media...

it's not news worthy, who cares what an eighty year old plus former first lady thinks, she don't make policy.
I agree.

And she’s nowhere near a “French Queen” what a ridiculous comparison. Marie-Antoinette was a witch and got what she deserved. Barbra Bush is a sweet old lady who doesn’t use a speechwriter when talking in front of the media. She’s old and has about as much political power as my grandma.

Leave her be media. If you want to pick on someone find me the Governor of Louisiana.

Aenlic

09-07-2005, 17:13

Leave her be media. If you want to pick on someone find me the Governor of Louisiana.

If she wants the media to leave her be, then why was she on a much-publicized tour of the Astrodome with her hubby? A media event. A photo-op. Sorry, she doesn't get to parade around in public with an entourage of media and secret service and then get a pass on why she's there in the first place. ~:)

Del Arroyo

09-07-2005, 17:21

I have to admit that I don't get it. What's the big deal?? What did she say wrong??

Can anyone elaborate, or are people just in inarticulate-tittle-mode?

DA

Proletariat

09-07-2005, 17:49

This is not 'let them eat cake.' In fact, 'Let them eat cake' isn't really half as flippant as people made it out, but whatever.

She's basically in typical Texan fashion explaining the level of hospitality and that if they choose to continue their lives in Houston, that might even be a nice change from the past.

Stupid thing to say, but reading this thread one would think she told all black people from NO to go screw themselves.

Goofball

09-07-2005, 17:50

Stupid thing to say,

That's the key right there.

Proletariat

09-07-2005, 17:51

No, the key is the ridiculous moral outrage in this thread.

Aenlic

09-07-2005, 17:59

If she had said something like "They were in horrible conditions in flood and hurricane-ravaged New Orleans, so coming to the Astrodome is working out much better for them" then I don't think anyone would have a problem with it. The Astrodome is working out much better for them than the Superdome and trying to survive in the disaster area.

But that isn't what she said. With typical Bush family obliviousness, she said "And so many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this--this (she chuckles slightly) is working very well for them." This implies that living in cramped conditions in the Astrodome with just the clothes on their backs is working out better for them than being poor underprivileged people living in their own homes in New Orleans in their own town with their families etc. Homes and lives are now utterly destroyed along with all of their possessions. Uh huh. Typical Bush, completely disconnect from reality.

So in that sense, yeah, it does ring a little like Marie Antoinette's oblivious suggestion that cake is available and the starving poor can eat it - as if that was the only problem. ~D

yesdachi

09-07-2005, 18:00

If she wants the media to leave her be, then why was she on a much-publicized tour of the Astrodome with her hubby? A media event. A photo-op. Sorry, she doesn't get to parade around in public with an entourage of media and secret service and then get a pass on why she's there in the first place. ~:)
Good point :bow: . If you ask to have your picture taken you better make sure you don’t have a big piece of spinach in your teeth, but weren’t her hubby and the Clintons there? They are all more important then she is, in the political game, and none of them are quoted, good or bad. But they (media) pick out something the least important of them say and try and make a big deal of it.

The reason she on the much-publicized tour is to help raise awareness and money for the people she is criticized for talking about (probably also to help Bush Sr. get around ~;) ).

yesdachi

09-07-2005, 18:12

she told all black people from NO to go screw themselves.
What, this is an outrage. I totally change my opinion! ~;)

And @ Aenlic in your made up quote you obviously took time to think about what to say. She said what she said off the cuff and it came out wrong. I don’t think it is “typical Bush” She is old and was on the spot plenty of reason to make a slipped up comment, could have easily happened to anyone. She gets a pass from me. ~:) But if she did say all black people from NO to go screw themselves. I would take back the pass. ~;)

Aenlic

09-07-2005, 18:26

Maybe it'll help to hear her in her own words, rather than a written quote. Then again, maybe it won't. After all, this is the woman who played golf with her hubby the day after her daughter, who died of leukemia, was buried.

http://www.publicradio.org/tools/media/player/marketplace/2005/09/feature_barbarabush_sept5

KafirChobee

09-07-2005, 18:28

The statement as presented is outlandish - regardless of the stature of the public person saying it. However, interpretation of its actual meaning was leaped upon as being entirely negative, versus having some import of being in a possitive nature - that being that since these poor souls have nothing atleast they are now in a position to restart their lives (possibly in a more entitled or conciderate light). Though it is abhorant that one could seem so callous as to suggest these people are better off after Katrina than before, they certainly are in a better position to eventually better their former place in society than they were previously (in that, N.O. was one of the poorer neighborhoods of America - 35% unemployment, etc.).

I do not agree with what the former First Lady said, but I do believe it was taken out of context and splayed to reveal a much darker meaning than it actually had.

Gah! I'm defending a Bush! Gah! ~D :help:

Devastatin Dave

09-07-2005, 18:34

I just don't see how anyone could possibly be better off losing EVERYTHING including family members and pets (irreplacables) could possibly be better off. The ONLY way is if the politicians in that area get serious about helping the poor get skills for jobs and business and industry do the right thing and provide jobs to those willing to work. Sure she's old, but if she believes that these folks down there got a good deal out of whats happened to them, then she's an idiot. I love her, she was a great First Lady, but damn... :dizzy2:

Redleg

09-07-2005, 18:36

Gah! I'm defending a Bush! Gah! ~D :help:

That's because you dont want to see the partisanship in her statement like some are.

I would have to agree with you - what she said was stupid - but its not what some are making it out to be.

Gawain of Orkeny

09-07-2005, 18:53

I just don't see how anyone could possibly be better off losing EVERYTHING including family members and pets (irreplacables) could possibly be better off.

Thats because your not dirt poor like many of these people. The really sad thing is she is correct about many of these people. Certainly those who lost loved ones will not be better off for it. But many will now have better housing and more money than they did before the hurricane. Im sure many will not return to NO but stay in Texas as she said. The place is now a huge cesspool and was always a shitty place to live. Its a microcasim of what the US would look like if the liberals ran the country as they did NO for 60 years. You would think after 60 yeares of liberal governmant the place would be a utopia. Instead it was disaster even before the hurricane hit.

PanzerJaeger

09-07-2005, 19:15

The level at which some people seek to demonize the Bush family is almost as pathetic as it is idiotic. Wow, you guys are really tough, picking on an old lady.

Despite the spin some are trying to put on this - the Marie-Antoinette comparisons were especially dumb - its obvious there was no ill feeling in her words.

She had just visited people who had come from the horrors of NO to the relative safety and comfort of the superdome. Of course they're better off.

And would anyone argue that the people who were left in NO were underpriveledged? Considering they had very little to begin with and nothing now, the great Texas outpouring of support is working out damned well for them.

If you're going to Bush bash, choose a target that has at least served any time in office, morons. ~:rolleyes:

Devastatin Dave

09-07-2005, 19:34

If you're going to Bush bash, choose a target that has at least served any time in office, morons. ~:rolleyes:

I'm not Bush bashing, I'm just having a hard time seeing how losing everything you have, includings things that CAN'T be replaced, would make you better off. I guess I'm a moron then. ~:handball:

Brenus

09-07-2005, 19:36

“the Marie-Antoinette comparisons were especially dumb”: Not really because Marie Antoinette didn’t meant harm neither. She was really worried about the poor French starving… It is worst, because that is the proof that these people are completely cut from reality…
And to just imagine than refuges are better of is an insult to intelligence…
And to be old isn’t an excuse to be stupid, criminal or what ever else. I am tired of his kind of sentences. If Milosevic would be 90, his crimes should be forgotten? Stalin is not guilty because he died from old age?
She was the first lady, she still has a place at the front page of the news, and she should have shut-up. Or, at least she should express herself in better way. And I think she did.

yesdachi

09-07-2005, 19:52

I thought a comparison to Mari-Antoinett was bad now Milosevic and Stalin? Wow. I say stupid stuff all the time maybe I’m as bad as Hitler or Mao. :dizzy2:

Thanks for the link Aenlic but I’ve been hearing it all morning on the radio. :bow:

Kanamori

09-07-2005, 20:41

Oh no, the upper-class does know what it has over the poor. They may not understand, however, living in poverty the way the poor do. As to the truthfulness of her statement -- I do not know if she meant 'underpriveleged' as in "living on the streets before the storm" or as "people that once had homes and no longer do" -- I believe she is correct. Anyways, we do not know if it was a wry chuckle, I myself am known for them and it sometimes gets me into trouble, or if it was some very poorly timed humor. At any rate, that kind of humor runs in the Bush family, I think.

Ronin

09-07-2005, 20:45

let them eat war is much more up the Bush´s alley...

Xiahou

09-07-2005, 21:33

If she wants the media to leave her be, then why was she on a much-publicized tour of the Astrodome with her hubby? A media event. A photo-op. Sorry, she doesn't get to parade around in public with an entourage of media and secret service and then get a pass on why she's there in the first place. ~:)Gee, maybe it has something to do with the fact that Clinton and her husband have been called upon to raise relief funding. It's tough to do that hiding under your desk. But nevermind, where were we? Oh yes, beating up on an old woman... :rolleyes:

I listened to the soundbyte and the "chuckle" that's being made so much of is virtually inaudible and if you pay attention, you hear her make the same sound at various points throughout her entire interview. I don't think it was laughter.

I think Marie-Antoinette is a good comparison myself. No it isn't. By her statement, if anything, she was overestimating how bad they had it y thinking that the AtroDome is better than their normal living conditions. That's pretty much the direct opposite of "let them eat cake".

Goofball

09-07-2005, 21:43

The place is now a huge cesspool and was always a shitty place to live. Its a microcasim of what the US would look like if the liberals ran the country as they did NO for 60 years.

That may well be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said on these boards, G.

NO's problem was not one of ideology (i.e. liberalism or conservatism), but one of corruption. And corruption knows no ideology; both liberals and conservatives give in to its temptations all too regularly.

Gawain of Orkeny

09-07-2005, 22:02

NO's problem was not one of ideology (i.e. liberalism or conservatism), but one of corruption. And corruption knows no ideology; both liberals and conservatives give in to its temptations all too regularly.

In this case it was clearly Liberal corruption or have the conservatives been running NO for the last 60 years?

Corrupt,carefree city reaps what it sowed]Corrupt, carefree city reaps what it sowedBy BOB BARR
Published on: 09/07/05
Although the floodwaters in New Orleans have begun to recede, the problems they leave in their deadly wake will present challenges for decades to come, challenges that in much the same way changed the character of our nation when the Mississippi Delta was deluged in the great flood of 1927.

The New Orleans that lay in the path of the floodwaters of the mighty Mississippi River in 1927 was, like its modern incarnation, steeped in corruption, deep and pervasive. It was, in some measure, this man-made infliction that held back steps that could have avoided — at least in part — the devastation visited on the city in 1927, and it is corruption that plays a role in the dark present and murky future of the city.

Perhaps no response to the flooding speaks so eloquently, or painfully, of New Orleans' problem than the remarks by its police department leadership that its officers — overworked and "traumatized" by the ordeal of the previous week — deserved a weeklong Las Vegas vacation. The N.O.P.D. is possessed of a long-standing and apparently well-deserved reputation for corruption and incompetence. Yet in this latest crisis, it seems to have outdone itself.

Not only did many police officers not show up for work during the flood, but some reportedly even joined in the looting that rocked the city. The response of the department's leadership? To whine and complain that others (read "Washington") were not doing enough to save the city its officers were sworn to protect. Such an attitude should scare the dickens out of those contemplating a return to the city following its dry-out. It telegraphs that it will be business as usual in the city.

Perhaps even worse, the city leadership appears ready to refuse to assume responsibility for its own safety and instead place the future of New Orleans in the hands of the federal government.

Ironically, the seeds of this attitude — that it is the job of the federal government to protect all of us whenever there is a disaster manufactured by man or God — while prevalent throughout the America of this 21st century, was born after the great flood of 1927. Today, it has come full circle in the city of its birth

That may well be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said on these boards, G.

I seriously doubt it.

LINK (http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0905/07edbarr.html)

Papewaio

09-07-2005, 22:10

who cares what an eighty year old plus former first lady thinks, she don't make policy.

Don't Conservatives believe in parents teaching values to their children ? (Actually both sides of the fence do)

So with this perceived attitude of elitism what has this former first lady taught the current president?

What happens if Bush Jr is asking mummy (Prince Charles like) what to do with the New Orleans situation?

Red Harvest

09-07-2005, 22:13

If you're going to Bush bash, choose a target that has at least served any time in office, morons. ~:rolleyes:

How can you say that?

This rule certainly wasn't applied to Hillary when her husband was running for Prez... I couldn't believe the things my "conservative" colleagues would say. Guess I was brought up better. Most of what they said were what I considered fighting words. If they said that about my wife someone would have had to pry me off of their bludgeoned corpse.

As for what Barbara said, sounds pretty stupid but not mean spirited. It merely illustrates how out of touch the whole family is. We knew this already, nothing really new.

Zharakov

09-07-2005, 22:13

They could do the Communist / Socialist thing and kill everyone for being dum enough to be un-able to leave...

Red Harvest

09-07-2005, 22:16

That may well be the most ridiculous thing you have ever said on these boards, G.

I seriously doubt it.

LINK (http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0905/07edbarr.html)

Gawain, that was unfair putting the link there. I thought you were pointing us to "the most ridiculous thing you have ever said on these boards." ~D

I was wanting to find out what you though that was. ~:wave:

PanzerJaeger

09-07-2005, 22:17

That was a good example of taking one misguided idea and building a whole lot of reasonable assumptions onto it to attempt to give it legitimacy.

The elitism in her comments is non-existent. She was simply expressing happyness that the people are doing well in her home state, as is evident after reading and listening to her comments.

Goofball

09-07-2005, 22:39

In this case it was clearly Liberal corruption or have the conservatives been running NO for the last 60 years?

What you don't seem to understand is that there is a difference between liberals who are to be corrupt being to blame and liberalism as an ideology being to blame.

Or are you seriously trying to argue that corruption is a taint specific only to liberals and that conservatives by definition are not corrupt?

Tribesman

09-07-2005, 22:50

Corrupt,carefree city reaps what it sowed]Corrupt, carefree city reaps what it sowedBy BOB BARR
I do love your sources Gawain ~D ~D ~D
Would this be the same purjuring anti-abortionist abortioner , who complained that there must be a conspiracy against him and that people must have been looking at the FBIs file on him to be able make such claims against him~;)

Maybe he should stick to his crusade against paganism and humanism as the true root of the rise in violence in America ~D ~D ~D

PanzerJaeger

09-07-2005, 22:59

This rule certainly wasn't applied to Hillary when her husband was running for Prez... I couldn't believe the things my "conservative" colleagues would say. Guess I was brought up better. Most of what they said were what I considered fighting words. If they said that about my wife someone would have had to pry me off of their bludgeoned corpse.

I am not responsible for the jokes your co-workers told about Hillary. In their defense, it was clear from the start that Hillary was seeking a political career, and attempted to play a role in the governmental process (socialized medicine, ect.). Barbara Bush has never made herself out to be a voice of authority or policy in politics.

Aenlic

09-07-2005, 23:04

No it isn't. By her statement, if anything, she was overestimating how bad they had it y thinking that the AtroDome is better than their normal living conditions. That's pretty much the direct opposite of "let them eat cake".

You don't know the actual history and events surrounding the statement by Marie Antoinette of "let them eat cake" do you, Xiahou? One should be wary of engaging in arguments without all of the facts. It can turn your post into a foot sucking debacle. Thus my statement regarding "let them eat cake" and its relevance deals with the real statement and its milieu, not the imagined legend which grew up around it. Nice try, though. ~:)

Aenlic

09-07-2005, 23:08

If, Gawain is going to quote Bob Barr, then I might as well start quoting Michael Moore and Al Franken. Only seems fair. I wonder what the knee-jerk reaction to my using, say, Micheal Moore's website as a source would be? Hmmm. Let me take a second or two to ponder that question. ~D

AntiochusIII

09-07-2005, 23:13

Thats because your not dirt poor like many of these people. The really sad thing is she is correct about many of these people. Certainly those who lost loved ones will not be better off for it. But many will now have better housing and more money than they did before the hurricane.I'll be as stereotypical as possible since Gawain's post here is, remember, I'm being stereotypical to the extreme: "you republicans don't really care about real human lives but just money"
Im sure many will not return to NO but stay in Texas as she said. The place is now a huge cesspool and was always a shitty place to live.It is likely so.
Its a microcasim of what the US would look like if the liberals ran the country as they did NO for 60 years. You would think after 60 yeares of liberal governmant the place would be a utopia. Instead it was disaster even before the hurricane hit.Talk about partisanship. Look at the mirrors first, guys, before calling others bad names.

Gawain of Orkeny

09-07-2005, 23:41

Talk about partisanship. Look at the mirrors first, guys, before calling others bad names.

I guess you and others simply cant handle the truth. These people have come to rely on the government to do all theirwork for them. Its not called the big easy for nothing. If Guiliani were Mayor tere I can garuntee things would have been far different.

Or are you seriously trying to argue that corruption is a taint specific only to liberals and that conservatives by definition are not corrupt?

No IM talking specifics here and specifically NO. It is a bastion of liberalism if there ever was one. A good example of what brininging everyone down to the lowest common denominator gets you.

Tribesman

09-07-2005, 23:48

If Guiliani were Mayor tere I can garuntee things would have been far different.
Yes Gawain , very different , and tell me , were any of the emergency workers ever prosecuted for the looting that occured at Ground Zero ?

Gawain of Orkeny

09-07-2005, 23:50

Yes Gawain , very different , and tell me , were any of the emergency workers ever prosecuted for the looting that occured at Ground Zero ?

Was this done by the NYPD?

t1master

09-08-2005, 00:13

the real issue imho, is the same with the sheehan media debacle... it is really not news, not in the important scheme of things anyhoo. quoting an old first lady, like following some greiving tool around is a media apparation. a smoke screen to scew how far the media is off the plot, and how they've become a tabloid that should be shelved in the checkout isles of walmat. they're all about marketing and selling more copies, not journalism or news reporting, all the big three in american media both tele and rag all tout the latest reality show right up there with the crap coverage of major events.

Devastatin Dave

09-08-2005, 00:56

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 01:18

I guess you and others simply cant handle the truth.

Flashback to A Few Good Men! But wasn't the character who uttered those words in the movie the guilty one? ~D

Del Arroyo

09-08-2005, 02:03

The fact is that alot of people probably will be better off after this disaster, and you're overreacting if you think saying it is offensive.

For those who had nothing and were trapped in violent, dilapidated neighborhoods, their new homes and living arrangements will likely be a positive change.

People who held steady jobs/owned their own homes/owned their own businesses will almost definitely not see a material net credit out of this flood, but they may well grow stronger morally. And some who lost everything including their whole family may fall to pieces. Thus it is with disasters-- like the rest of life, a chaotic affair.

DA

Byzantine Prince

09-08-2005, 02:04

Meh. So what? Everyone that has power(or is around it) knows that they could have helped millions of those people get out of poverty before the hurricane. I don't think this statement should come as any surprise.

Helping people get out of poverty saves a lot of live BTW, I just wanted to add that. If you want to change society from mass death due to negligence and war, don't vote conservative! It's that simple. If you like it conservative, keep them in office by voting for them. Who knows maybe you will be better off personally.

Gawain of Orkeny

09-08-2005, 02:07

Helping people get out of poverty saves a lot of live BTW, I just wanted to add that.

Again ths was a democratic bastion for 60 years. If you need anymore proof that their ideas or that the welfare state and socialism dont work just look at NO. A third world nation in the middle of the US.

Red Harvest

09-08-2005, 02:10

I am not responsible for the jokes your co-workers told about Hillary. In their defense, it was clear from the start that Hillary was seeking a political career, and attempted to play a role in the governmental process (socialized medicine, ect.) A pathetic excuse to use for their being entirely ungentlemanly. I'm not taling about valid political comments, I'm referring to their trash talk. Wasn't just co-workers, it was pervasive. Folks like you and Gawain would be the first I would expect to hear the comments from.

I have more respect for Hillary, far more, than for either of the Bush wives. Why? She takes a lot of abuse, but she makes a difference and in a good way.

I have less respect (but some pity) for women who have little impact on their husbands' views. Barbara to her credit had some differences with George, Sr. during his term. Laura on the other hand...I watched an interview with her that revealed she had no real contribution at all. That seems to be what GOP voters like, but I consider the "barefoot and pregnant" crowd a bunch of dinosaurs who shouldn't have positions in which they are allowed to manage any women in the workplace.

PanzerJaeger

09-08-2005, 04:40

A pathetic excuse to use for their being entirely ungentlemanly. I'm not taling about valid political comments, I'm referring to their trash talk. Wasn't just co-workers, it was pervasive. Folks like you and Gawain would be the first I would expect to hear the comments from.

Hehe, feel free to indulge your preconcieved notions about me, Im used to it. ~:cheers:

I have more respect for Hillary, far more, than for either of the Bush wives. Why? She takes a lot of abuse, but she makes a difference and in a good way.

Name something good Hillary has done.

I have less respect (but some pity) for women who have little impact on their husbands' views. Barbara to her credit had some differences with George, Sr. during his term. Laura on the other hand...I watched an interview with her that revealed she had no real contribution at all. That seems to be what GOP voters like, but I consider the "barefoot and pregnant" crowd a bunch of dinosaurs who shouldn't have positions in which they are allowed to manage any women in the workplace.

Yea you know its a funny thing with us dinosaurs. We like the person we voted for to be making policy decisions, not the person's spouse. ~:rolleyes:

I do admire your ability to take a seemingly minute example and form an entire diatribe against a huge group of people. Youve mastered it far beyond I could ever hope to.

For example, you take the fact that the president's wife doesnt get involved in trying to influence him politically and twist it into an assumption that people who vote GOP enjoy keeping women barefoot and pregnant. Further, you have decided that GOP voters shouldnt be allowed to manage women in the workplace. So in essense, youve turned Laura Bush's decision to stay out of politics into the fact that conservatives dont respect women.

Really, Goebbels would love it, and thats no insult. An impressive technique indeed. :bow:

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 04:54

The misearable bitch should be hung by her thumbnails and given repeated enemas with the outflow from one of the levee pumps. There... you Bush-whackers feel better?

Fohken-Eh, let it go. She was trying to be gracious in a difficult situation (for the record, she failed, true, but as somebody who's had awkward moments themselves, let me say: BFD) What she saw probably threw her back a turn or two. Imagine that. Apocalyptic horror threw her off balance. And for those of you who sit here and pronounce your judgement on her, I suppose you're only taking a break between helping the hurricane victims yourselves? Glad to see dying children and a disaster of biblical proportions didn't even raise an eyebrow on your cynical selves. What's that you say, you haven't been down there and seen the horror in person yourself??? Wait, what's that word I'm looking for.... could it be HYPOCRITE!!!

Khafir, my hat's off to you. When I've misjudged somebody, I'm the first to admit it. :bow: I'm going to have to start reading what your posts again... damn... just when I was cutting back on my .ORG time.

Devastatin Dave

09-08-2005, 05:04

I have less respect (but some pity) for women who have little impact on their husbands' views. Barbara to her credit had some differences with George, Sr. during his term. Laura on the other hand...I watched an interview with her that revealed she had no real contribution at all. That seems to be what GOP voters like, but I consider the "barefoot and pregnant" crowd a bunch of dinosaurs who shouldn't have positions in which they are allowed to manage any women in the workplace.

Atleast the current First Lady isn't a political whore that would do anything short of murder to fullfill her ambitions. "barefoot and pregnant" crowd? That's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. You want to see the barefoot and pregnant crowd? Just look at all those democratic voters right now living in shelters. Let me do the math for you...
There's a Democrat Mayor, a Democrat City Council, a Democrat Chief of Police, a Democrat Attorney General, a Democrat Governor, a Democrat Lt. Governor, 24 of 39 Louisiana State Senators are Democrat, 67 of 105 Louisiana State House Representatives are Democrat, there's a Democrat Representative in the House from New Orleans, and one of two Senators in the Senate is a Democrat.
And New Oleans is now a destroyed city. So you might want to drop that political BS about the wives. The only thing Hillary and the rest of the Dems are oing right now, like usual, is pointing fingers and trying to angle herself for the White House. She could give a ", golly gosh darnet" (just to make the mods happy) about those people.
Again, I thought what Barbara Bush said was stupid, but then again I might be reading out of context. But for you to go after Laura Bush is just pathetic.

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 05:12

Devastatin Dave

09-08-2005, 05:15

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 05:16

If a poor black man were to run a stop sign and kill a young white high school athlete in a car with the right of way on a crossroad, what would happen? Should he be charged with manslaughter? Should he, at the very least, be issued a traffic citation?

What has that got to do with the topic of this thread? Barbara Bush's comments equated to vehicular homicide in your book? Put the hookah down and engage your brain, man.

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 05:51

Just answer the question and I'll tell you what it has to do with this thread.

If a poor black man ran a stop sign, hit a car with the right of way and killed the occupant of the other car, who was a young white male high school athlete, what would be the result. Would he be charged with manslaughter? Would he be charged with any crime at all? Would he even get a ticket? Let's, just for the sake of argument, also stipulate that this accident takes place in the South. ~:)

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 05:59

Oh, here we go. You're going to come up with some extreme example and attempt to apply it at large. No, I'm not going to play your silly game.

I will say:

If ANYBODY intentionally ran a STOP sign and hit ANYBODY, causing a resultant death, or through their own negligence, such as intoxication, lost the ability to STOP and caused ANYBODY'S death, they should be charged with vehicular homocide. Black or white perp or victim, it shouldn't make a difference.

If you're going to try to paint me to be a racist because I don't agree with you that Barbara Bush is the anti-Christ, have fun. Much better men then you have tried to smear me in the past. Before you go down this road, you might want to consider that it was the lack of racially equality in it's application that finally turned me against the death penalty.

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 06:01

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 06:02

By the way Aenlic, while we're playing twenty questions, I'm sure you must have a rich lazy slag like Barbara Bush beat.... how many hours have you spent helping Hurricane evacuees in Texas, Louisiana or Mississipi?

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 06:03

I'm a disabled vet. I transferred my entire disability check to the Red Cross last Friday. How about you? ~D Do you suppose that Barbara Bush gave an entire month's income to the relief effort this week? Or did she just "tour" the facilities on a photo op?

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 06:05

What if they didn't intentionally run the stop sign, maybe just didn't see it, but did run it. Wouldn't that meet the definition of manslaughter? Wouldn't you, at least, expect the person to get a ticket for running a stop sign and killing another human being?

If SOMEBODY (you're the one who brought the race of the driver and the victim into this) ran a STOP sign and hit SOMEBODY & killed them, but it could be proved that it was through no fault of their own, no, they shouldn't face any charges. Again, wtf is your point?

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 06:06

If SOMEBODY (you're the one who brought the race of the driver and the victim into this) ran a STOP sign and hit SOMEBODY & killed them, but it could be proved that it was through no fault of their own, no, they shouldn't face any charges. Again, wtf is your point?

If you run a stop sign, because you weren't paying attention, are you not at fault for running the stop sign?

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 06:08

I'm a disabled vet. I transferred my entire disability check to the Red cross last Friday. How about you? ~D

Good for you, I'm proud of you. Slightly out of character for such a misanthrope as yourself, but I'm glad to see you could move beyond.

My wife & I spent last weekend and will spend this coming weekend coordinating shipments from the local foodbank to go the Hurricane afflicted areas. We agreed to raise our non-church related charitable giving from 10% to 15% (which brings my total take-home to ~30% of my salary) and will give the additional 5% to the Salvation Army. We're also on a list offering a room to a family.

By the way, you might want to look into the Red Cross before you go sign your checks over. You might have just made a local chapter president even richer.

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 06:09

If you run a stop sign, because you weren't paying attention, are you not at fault for running the stop sign?

Hmmm, now you're describing negligence. Was the driver at fault or not?

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 06:13

Hmmm, now you're describing negligence. Was the driver at fault or not?

I'm being nitpicky, because it appears you're trying to get me to say "Black driver! White victim! Hang his ass!" I don't think that way and I'm not going to pander to your silly little games that attempt to portray me as doing so. Either the driver, white or black, was responsible for their actions while driving and is therefore is responsible for running a stop sign, and justice calls for some sanction, or they were not. If the driver had a heart attack 30 seconds prior, would you charge them?

Productivity

09-08-2005, 06:17

Dumb statement made in a particularly traumatic time - sure she should probably apologise for it and clarrify herself as it was probably pretty hurtful, but I hardly think she needs to be defenestrated for it.

Don Corleone

09-08-2005, 06:18

Sorry, I don't have time for you to attempt to be witty. I have to get up and go to work tomorrow. So let's cut to the chase. Black driver, white victim, I'm a Republican... yeah, I'd buy the rope myself to lynch him. Is that what you're looking for? Have a good night. Maybe one day you'll be able to put together a cognizant argument. Looking forward to it.... ~:wave:

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 06:20

Better than the United Way or some church. The fund was set up by my bank and went directly to the Red Cross fund for the Katrina disaster relief.

Now back to the topic at hand...

In my state, at least, Texas, if you run a stop sign or are speeding or in any way are violating traffic laws and it results in a death, then the charge is manslaughter. Not murder. Murder is intentional. A death which results from neglect in not following the law is manslaughter.

Also, in my state, the chances are pretty much zero of a black man not even being given a ticket for running a stop sign and striking another car broadside at a two way stop, meaning the other car had the right of way as well as the traffic sign being there.

However, in Texas, on November 6th, 1963 on a clear night with no rain at about 8 pm, a chevy sedan ran a stop sign at the intersection of two roads with 55 mph speed limits, struck another car broadside and ejected the other driver breaking his neck and killing him. In the car which ran the stop sign were two 17 year old girls. The driver who ran the stop sign, breaking the law, and killing the other driver was also the daughter of one of the richest and most powerful men in the town. She received no ticket. The records are public, with the police report being released to the media in May of 2000. The space for how fast she was going is blank. The space for the charges is blank. But the fact that she ran the stop sign, the road conditions, the time, and the fact that the accident resulted in the death of the other driver is clear as day. She wasn't even given a ticket for running the stop sign, whereas a black man in 1963 could have expected manslaughter charges at least. Her name? Laura Welch. Her maiden name, that is. She is now Laura Bush. Just another example of typical Bush family obliviousness. ~D

Azi Tohak

09-08-2005, 06:23

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 07:11

Meh. If you follow anyone around for a day, and record everything they say, there is not one person who will go a full day without saying either:

A. Something just flat dumb.

B. Something that can be taken out of context to eviscerate them.

...Wait... I did just think of a person. A politician who pays more attention to what the polls tell him to say than what his actual ideas are.

Azi

Bush? Oh, wait. No, Bush pays more attention to what Karl Rove tells him to say than to the polls; and he doesn't have any actual ideas. If you hold his head up to your ear, then you can hear the sound of the ocean! No, really! So, you must mean someone else. Cheney? Possibly, but he's probably too busy sitting on the toilet waiting for the laxative to take effect so he won't look so constipated all of the time. Nixon looked more relaxed than Cheney does. Maybe Dennis Hastert? No, he doesn't pay attention to polls, either. Now there's a child molestation story just waiting to hit the papers. I mean, look at the guy! I'll bet his middle name is Wayne. Maybe you mean Bill Frist? There's a good candidate! Takes one look at the polls, eyes the 2008 calendar and drops the party line about stem cells! Is he the one?

Surely you don't mean Clinton! (gasp!) Wasn't he president something like 5 years or so ago? Talk about beating a dead horse! That horse doesn't even have flesh. It's just bones. That clacking sound your hear is the rib cage as you smack it.

Gawain of Orkeny

09-08-2005, 07:38

Surely you don't mean Clinton! (gasp!) Wasn't he president something like 5 years or so ago? Talk about beating a dead horse! That horse doesn't even have flesh. It's just bones. That clacking sound your hear is the rib cage as you smack it.

Well his bitch is running in a few years and he never shuts his mouth so hes still fair game. ~D Theres a lot more than just bones clacking around.

No, Bush pays more attention to what Karl Rove tells him to say than to the polls; and he doesn't have any actual ideas. If you hold his head up to your ear, then you can hear the sound of the ocean!

And you really believe this. No more need be said.

PanzerJaeger

09-08-2005, 07:44

^Dont you have a bridge to crawl under Aenlic? Theres no need to harass every passerby that happens to have an opinion.

If you notice, I limited my obnoxious patronizing to a single post. Thats a habit I highly recommend to you.. ~;)

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 07:48

I hope Hilary Clinton runs. It would be a perfectly pathetic race then.

What would it be? George Allen vs Hilary Clinton? I'd definitely write in Mickey Mouse as the lesser of three evils then. ~D

At least in 2008 we can be sure of one thing. No more Dubya. He can go back to doing this:

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft/images/bush_goofy/george_w_bush_picks_nose_at_baseball_game.gif

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 07:51

Xiahou

09-08-2005, 08:03

Now back to the topic at hand...

In my state, at least, Texas, if you run a stop sign or are speeding or in any way are violating traffic laws and it results in a death, then the charge is manslaughter. Not murder. Murder is intentional. A death which results from neglect in not following the law is manslaughter.

Also, in my state, the chances are pretty much zero of a black man not even being given a ticket for running a stop sign and striking another car broadside at a two way stop, meaning the other car had the right of way as well as the traffic sign being there.

However, in Texas, on November 6th, 1963 on a clear night with no rain at about 8 pm, a chevy sedan ran a stop sign at the intersection of two roads with 55 mph speed limits, struck another car broadside and ejected the other driver breaking his neck and killing him. In the car which ran the stop sign were two 17 year old girls. The driver who ran the stop sign, breaking the law, and killing the other driver was also the daughter of one of the richest and most powerful men in the town. She received no ticket. The records are public, with the police report being released to the media in May of 2000. The space for how fast she was going is blank. The space for the charges is blank. But the fact that she ran the stop sign, the road conditions, the time, and the fact that the accident resulted in the death of the other driver is clear as day. She wasn't even given a ticket for running the stop sign, whereas a black man in 1963 could have expected manslaughter charges at least. Her name? Laura Welch. Her maiden name, that is. She is now Laura Bush. Just another example of typical Bush family obliviousness. ~DObjection your honor! Relevance?

Honestly, what on earth does this have to do with the topic? And what a circumlocutious, tortured way of getting around to what amounts to "Yeah well, Laura Bush is a killer and got away with it!" I thought this thread was restricted to bashing an 80yr old woman? Apparently it's fair game for any Bush bashing though. Why not trot out Bush's DUI charges too? Oh, and don't forget "Bush lied, people died"! :rolleyes:

Aenlic

09-08-2005, 08:14

I didn't bring up Laura Bush first.

Actually if anything, it was a circumlocutious way of saying "Laura Bush may have been guilty of manslaughter" not murder. I specifically ruled out murder some posts back. ~D

And since the thread is about whether or not Barbara Bush is an insensitive cow, a discussion of a general attitude of insensitivity, being oblivious to those around them, and insulation in privilege seemed appropriate. Thus, Laura Bush getting away with manslaughter, not even a ticket.

And we could bring up Dubya's DWI. Shall we? Nosepicking in public is more amusing though. It speaks to a certain oblivious unconcern, doesn't it?

This man is our commander in chief! Does this one really need a caption?

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft/images/bush_goofy/george_w_bush_goofy_inside_out_umbrella.jpg

At least he's driving instead of her in the next one. The only people who have to worry about being run over by the male Goober in the family are... well, everyone.

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft/images/bush_goofy/george_w_bush_making_a_turn_in_open_car.jpg

And, last but not least, now we know why he was a cheerleader. check out that amazing wrist action!

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft/images/bush_goofy/george_w_bush_throwing_football_2004_at_browns_camp.jpg