>>Ah, the other mantra of right-wingers (are you?) - when you hit them with an article, or a statement from an elected official, they start the if oSource.reilaible=.t....
>
>You call chat room material report from a GERMAN "PROGRESSIVEIndependent..." reporter a fair look at what is happening down south? Ok if you way so.....
Gotcha! The webpage is actually a transcript of what was broadcasted on the huge German TV network ZDF, but you didn't bother to read, as soon as you found the proscribed word you were looking for. And, btw, I also saw pretty much the same story from a different reporter, on BRD (the other large German network).
>Maybe what she reported didn't air on any of the American media because it did'nt actually happen the way she discribed it, if at all.
Of course. Two largest German networks weren't informed at all. They completely lost the moment when they were supposed to shut their lenses and leave the place with the entourage, and accidentally stayed a while longer. Nothing to see there, move along.
>Bush is not, by no means, perfect, but I don't think he's that stupid, not stupid enough to stage something and leave.
No comment.
>You can believe anything about someone if you really hate him/her enough. :-)
>The Mary L. Landrieu article, what is it that she wants? What was her point in the article?
The point was that during the photo-op there were a bunch of machines patching the levee. The next morning there was just one.
> What did she do before the strom hit to warn her people? Yeah Bush this and Bush that, same-'o, same-'o. Blame the president more matter what.
Matter what? Or "no matter what". You lost me here. You mean the President is blamed no matter what, but despite that, he launches his own investigation AND the Congress also plans to launch one?
So, if we're in the blame game, why does Reuters say
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N06101601.htm ?
And this
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc.cfm?A=fs&B=109&C=1&D=86 also looks interesting. Just numbers, though, no accusations.