A-ha!
It turns out that they don't have TVs at the White House, or at DHS. This explains so much.
The New York Times runs an article by Times reporter Elisabeth 'White House transcriptionist' Bumiller.
Apparently none of them turned on the TV! Days after millions of Americans were watching scenes of horror 24 hours-a-day on multiple cable networks, Chertoff is relying on reports from Brownie, and W. is relying on reports from Chertoff? Then there's a report of a problem, and the response is to ask Andy Card to find out what's going on? When he could have just turned on CNN and gotten a live feed showing those very people standing at the Convention Center? Have they gotten so used to manipulating the press and feeding them lies that they don't even bother watching cable news?
This is the response of the administration that wants us to believe it's OK for W to be off on his ranch for weeks at a time, because they are so hip to modern communications technology that it doesn't matter where he is? TV shows like 'The West Wing' would have us believe that there are TVs pumping the latest news into almost every room in the building. I guess that went out with the Clinton administration.
Where would we be if that unidentified aide hadn't hand-carried that news agency report into the Oval Office?
The article intends to focus on Michael Brown, and the process leading to his reassignment back to Washington, but, unwittingly, it serves as a bitter indictment of Brown's bosses themselves.
The New York Times runs an article by Times reporter Elisabeth 'White House transcriptionist' Bumiller.
The president, long reluctant to fire subordinates, came to a belated recognition that his administration was in trouble for the way it had dealt with the disaster, many of his supporters say. One moment of realization occurred on Thursday of last week when an aide carried a news agency report from New Orleans into the Oval Office for him to see.What's wrong with this picture, which we can assume was essentially dictated to Bumiller by White House sources?
The report was about the evacuees at the convention center, some dying and some already dead. Mr. Bush had been briefed that morning by his homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, who was getting much of his information from Mr. Brown and was not aware of what was occurring there. The news account was the first that the president and his top advisers had heard not only of the conditions at the convention center but even that there were people there at all.
"He's not a screamer," a senior aide said of the president. But Mr. Bush, angry, directed the White House chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., to find out what was going on.
Apparently none of them turned on the TV! Days after millions of Americans were watching scenes of horror 24 hours-a-day on multiple cable networks, Chertoff is relying on reports from Brownie, and W. is relying on reports from Chertoff? Then there's a report of a problem, and the response is to ask Andy Card to find out what's going on? When he could have just turned on CNN and gotten a live feed showing those very people standing at the Convention Center? Have they gotten so used to manipulating the press and feeding them lies that they don't even bother watching cable news?
This is the response of the administration that wants us to believe it's OK for W to be off on his ranch for weeks at a time, because they are so hip to modern communications technology that it doesn't matter where he is? TV shows like 'The West Wing' would have us believe that there are TVs pumping the latest news into almost every room in the building. I guess that went out with the Clinton administration.
Where would we be if that unidentified aide hadn't hand-carried that news agency report into the Oval Office?
The article intends to focus on Michael Brown, and the process leading to his reassignment back to Washington, but, unwittingly, it serves as a bitter indictment of Brown's bosses themselves.
posted by Paul at 11:00 AM |
|
email this
