The Blame Game.....fill me in?

I've read that John Roberts resume is very similar to Brown's. And he could be our new Chief Justice.


How come they would appoint someone new all together to the top position? Why wouldn't one of the existing Supreme Court judges step into the Chief Justice role? I would think that experience would be a good thing. (this is a serious question, we were just talking about it last night)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adina

I've read that John Roberts resume is very similar to Brown's. And he could be our new Chief Justice.


How come they would appoint someone new all together to the top position? Why wouldn't one of the existing Supreme Court judges step into the Chief Justice role? I would think that experience would be a good thing. (this is a serious question, we were just talking about it last night)

---

I have asked myself these same questions Adina, although I haven't heard much about his resume. I don't know enuf about how the whole Supreme Court appointments work so I don't have any answers for you.

I listened to some of the appointment hearing today at work. I have to say that I was impressed with the man, and I'm not a fan of the Bush administration. I was dead set against him with he was first nominated because I don't agree with the way W has been running things. I figured anyone the George wanted, would have to be someone that I wouldn't want. But the more I hear and read, the less apprehensive I have become about Roberts. I would feel a lot better if he wasn't up for Chief Justice tho. The one thing that does scare me a bit about John Roberts, is his age. He is only 50 years old, and a lifetime appointment to the highest juditial bench in the land, gives him a lot of time to try to mold the court.

WHO put him there ?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0011203-6.html

IAHA was NEVER part of ANY OLYMPIC COMMITTEE...

the man responsible for directing federal relief operations in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, sharpened his emergency management skills as the "Judges and Stewards Commissioner" for the International Arabian Horses Association... a position from which he was forced to resign in the face of mounting litigation and financial disarray.

Now we all know that our government can tell you the time I crap if they want to know ;), so why can't they figure out that the release is a inflated bunch of lies.

What a shock! Bush finally stated that he was ultimately responsible for the bungling of the nation's biggest natural disaster. No one really expected that as he has always blamed others for his problems.

Regardless of reasons, fair is fair. I congratulate Bush for taking this step. It is his first honest try at being a real leader and a welcome response to the situation. Good work!

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Fanelli

What a shock! Bush finally stated that he was ultimately responsible for the bungling of the nation's biggest natural disaster. No one really expected that as he has always blamed others for his problems.

Regardless of reasons, fair is fair. I congratulate Bush for taking this step. It is his first honest try at being a real leader and a welcome response to the situation. Good work!

.

---

I was shocked to hear this too! It was a step in the right direction for Bush.

Better late than never huh. But what does he have to loose by telling the truth? He has the best benefit package known to man FOR LIFE already and will still command a high figure to lecture like Clinton does. The man was a C average student people! What other C average student makes it to the top with lies and deceit?

Ah yes I am pro bush as you can tell :)

None the less.... I have to respect a man who admits his errors !

Penny, I saw that picture on snopes yesterday. It is, of course, obviously faked.

Here's another hilarious one they had. This one actually appeared on Irish TV. Sky News, to be specific. Sky News kept me informed of the Tsunami day and night for the nearly two weeks I was in London this past winter. They do a very good job of news reporting, and IMO "unbiased", or at least not with an agenda against Blair/Bush. So this is an obvious "oops" on the part of whoever makes up captions. But still very funny. :D


source: http://www.snopes.com/photos/katrina/disaster.asp

I saw recently (like a day or two after Bush took responsiblilty) that the governer of LA also stepped up and took responsiblity.

While I admit, I'm not Bush's biggest fan, I thought it was well done of him to step up and say that he made a mistake. But with the governer making the same announcement the next day, the whole thing to me seems like a game of one-upmanship. Perhaps I'm just a political cynic, but that was the first thought that popped into my head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adina

I saw recently (like a day or two after Bush took responsiblilty) that the governer of LA also stepped up and took responsiblity.

While I admit, I'm not Bush's biggest fan, I thought it was well done of him to step up and say that he made a mistake. But with the governer making the same announcement the next day, the whole thing to me seems like a game of one-upmanship. Perhaps I'm just a political cynic, but that was the first thought that popped into my head.

---

I'm glad that he took resposibility for it, but the first thought that came to my mind was "political damage control".

I'm a bit of a political cynic myself and whenever I hear something like this, I always wonder what the motivation is behind it. Is it for the betterment of the people, or is it for the betterment of someones career/image?

"I always wonder what the motivation is behind it. Is it for the betterment of the people, or is it for the betterment of someones career/image?"



CHOICE 2 is my vote :)

GREAT images Penny and Kelly. I need the humor these days :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjs1973

I'm glad that he took resposibility for it, but the first thought that came to my mind was "political damage control".

I'm a bit of a political cynic myself and whenever I hear something like this, I always wonder what the motivation is behind it. Is it for the betterment of the people, or is it for the betterment of someones career/image?

---

My first thought when Bush took responsibility was the thought process (or advice) he must have gone through:

--------------------
Bush: But it's not my fault!

Advisor: But Mr. President, other presidents have taken heat for not taking responsibility, whether they were at fault or not! The people are expecting you to to be the "big man" and say that you take responsibility. If you don't, you'll go down in flames. If you do, that's all you'll have to do, and you can go about your normal business afterward and be the hero.

Bush: That's all I have to do to look good? Oh, OK, I'll do it!
--------------------

As for the Governor of LA, I was pretty sure during that first week she was going home at night, curling into the fetal position, and crying, "I don't want to be governor anymore! I don't want to be governor anymore!"

While I think she bears some blame, I'll bet her "taking responsibility" is much more real. I think she tried harder after the storm to get help, and her "responsibility" was in being ineffective at asking ... not for lack of trying. AND, who knows what amount of responsibility she bears for pre-storm decisions.

Ya know who you will NOT hear those words from, and who needs to say them most of all? Ray Nagin. Tough job, tough call, he made the wrong one. Before the storm, not after. He's a folk hero after the storm, but it's because of his decisions (and lack of a plan) that the shelter situation was so bad to begin with.

Oh, and you know who else? The Levee Committee. Wasted funds entrusted to them and let their community down. Not sayin' that if every penny they had would have gone to the levees they would not have broken ... Katrina was a monster storm ... but the fact that a good percentage of their money went towards fountains and parades doesn't help.


Why do I hold these opinions? I pretty much watched TV 24/7 during that first week. My opinions are formed by who I saw and what they said on CNN/msnbc/FOX during that first week. The Gov was one of the first portrayed as asking for help. Nagin only became prominent when the Convention Center crisis became evident.

disclaimer: these are simply MY opinions based on my incomplete and media/internet-fed knowledge. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adina

I've read that John Roberts resume is very similar to Brown's. And he could be our new Chief Justice.


How come they would appoint someone new all together to the top position? Why wouldn't one of the existing Supreme Court judges step into the Chief Justice role? I would think that experience would be a good thing. (this is a serious question, we were just talking about it last night)

---

John Roberts isn't all that new, he is very experienced at how the Supreme Court works as he led many cases that went before the court. I don't agree with anything Bush has done, or with most of his cronnies... especially the one who is now Govenor of Indiana Mitch Daniels (his slogan was "My Man Mitch" ... you can guess what the opposition called him, and he is still Bush's "b*tch). But Roberts is the best person Bush could possibly put on the bench... the scary part is who's next? There is another opening :eek:

JS

Anyone watch The Daily Show? I watched a rerun episode the other night and they showed this chart and this is what John Stewart had to say about it. This explains a lot. :D

"What should FEMA have done? Perhaps the answer can be found on their website. Well you'll find, we're not lying, this chart, clearly depicting the agencies responsibility in the event of a disaster. Notice, and this is their actual chart, It begins with their response to a disaster, leads to recovery, mitigation, risk reduction, prevention and preparedness and ends up... back in disaster. That is their chart. In truth, FEMA did exactly what they said they were going to do."