I know the matter of the seven minutes is a point of great importance to the nation, in your fevered brows. However, the title of the book shouldn’t enter into it.
Bush was, after all, reading to children. And kids don’t pay attention if you read aloud to them from the U.S. Code.
Hell, I read Goodnight Moon and The Very Hungry Caterpillar nearly every single day. I trust the generous, good natured liberals on this board will give me leave to do so, since I have twenty-one month old twins.
So you got your Ass handed to you in this thread and thought you would maybe whine about it some more in another thread?
By the way, I think there are several other things to focus on but why the hell if you are tired of it, did you start another thread?
Well, see, if he had been reading Dante to them, no one would be saying anything. Or maybe Twain, or Theroux, or, hell, even an Oriole’s box score. Something uplifting, y’know?
Are you really down to the point where the only thing you have left to defend is the book Bush was reading to the kids? Seriously?
Odd that you should mention The Very Hungry Caterpillar - in the last election, that was Bush’s answer when asked what his favorite book was as a child. It was written after he was already out of B-School. Granted, that’s not necessarily a contradiction.
And this cuts both ways, you know. Are liberals to the point where the only thing they have to criticize is the title of the book? It makes their arguments look petty in the extreme.
Wait, everyone. Get ready to read these words the fast way:
The fracas is not over a book, it’s over one little exercise called The Pet Goat, from a workbook designed to help children read.
Now, the big question is, who published the workbook that includes a syncopated tale of a goat? Does the name Negroponte ring a bell? And did his company directly benefit from “No Child Left Behind?”
Now, let’s all try to use our company voices, shall we?
Isn’t it “The Pet Goat” anyway. And Bush wasn’t reading it - the kids were.
Bush was instead sitting there like a gormless prannock. Since we know that the August terror briefing presented to Bush by Condi included information that AQ were planning to use hijacked planes as weapons, we surely can only conclude one of the following about his behaviour following the whispered information that a second plane had hit:
Bush never read the briefing.
Bush didn’t associate two planes hitting a high-value target as connected to the briefing.
Bush was fully aware of the implications of this, and was formulating a plan of action.
Bush was fully aware of the implications of this, but didn’t have the werewithall to get off his ass and get going, trapped like a bunny in the headlights until someone told him what to do.
Anyway, Mr. Moto, the reason this has been gloated about so much isn’t simply that he sat there like a pudding for seven minutes, but that the administration lied about the amount of time between him being informed of the disaster unfolding, and actually taking action - and got caught out.
Moto, you started a thread critizing Kerry for his actions at the start of 9/11. You failed to mention that he followed the matter on TV, and that he immediately came to the correct conclusion that it was a terrorist attack.
You were called on this by numerous posters, who pointed out that not only did Kerry act appropirately, but Bush did not act appropriately becasue he chose to read “My Pet Goat” rather than follow the emergency at hand.
Instead of retracting your OP, you have now started yet another thread (the second pit thread to emerge out of your original thread), this time complaining about “My Pet Goat” being named as the book which Bush was reading.
Why you have a problem with the name “My Pet Goat” is beyond me. Perhaps it is a religious thing. Perhaps something bad involving a pet goat took place in your past. Or perhaps you are desparately trying to squirm out of the box canyon in which you have placed yourself.
You should take the honest approach, and retract your original OP. But of course you won’t.
What are you trying to say here, that the president’s actions, or lack thereof, are completely irrelevent to the course of the nation? You brought it up with that bogus attack on Kerry. To most of us, it’s just a little datum on Bush’s character. Hardly worth much comment anymore, except when some asshole tries to turn history on its head for partisan gain.
Quite ironic that once the children finished reading “The Pet Goat” to him, Bush asked their teacher if they were reading more than they were watching TV, and then asked the students if they read more than they watched TV.
Rather poor situational awareness on Bush’s part, given that TV was covering the attacks that he was ignoring.
Bush should have run for school board supervisor, not president of the USA.
Ah but today’s not 9/11, and you’re not the President. Sometimes it’s the most complicated constructs that have the most simple answers!
The question is indeed begged, why did you vanish so completely from that dumb thread you started - though I’m sure it has nothing to do with one poster after another telling you how utterly absurd your OP was.
