Go to The Impossibility Of Knowing
- Add a comment
- Go to Can Anyone Give Me The Facts?
Vagueness works to Bush's advantage
Its all just buzzwords and emotional diplo-speak. They test everything they say with target audiences and once they get the right combination they puke it up to the rest of us.
The problem is that unlike you, and the rest of us more questioning bloggers on blogit, the majority of the people don't ask the questions your asking. They think they've heard something and they believe they know what he meant. Good post.
posted by
DebbieDowner
on October 8, 2005 at 7:50 PM
| link to this | reply
mayb
That's what happens when you declare what on something that can't be seen. He wouldn't be able to answer your question. . , because he knows there isn't an answer.
posted by
Joe_Love
on October 8, 2005 at 7:20 AM
| link to this | reply
the phrase "war on terror"
is a diversionary tactic used by a trickster to deflect our attention from what is really going on. A terrorist is someone who scares you, makes you uneasy and afraid to go about your normal routine. Our media is doing that. Our chief executive is doing that, no?
posted by
Pat_B
on October 8, 2005 at 6:52 AM
| link to this | reply
Tapsel-T, it is something which turns many reporters off too. People can only take being lied too constantly for so long.
posted by
Azur
on October 8, 2005 at 5:27 AM
| link to this | reply
Rabbitfromthewoods, yes the facts are carrots but rarely is the appetite satisfied
posted by
Azur
on October 8, 2005 at 5:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Scoop, I don't know -- much depends on if the general knows what he means as well
posted by
Azur
on October 8, 2005 at 5:23 AM
| link to this | reply
Ca88andra, yes the speechwriters hold the secrets
posted by
Azur
on October 8, 2005 at 5:22 AM
| link to this | reply
Brisbane artist, it's true that one cannot glean facts in an instant. That's what I always admire reporters who do it when put in tough situations
posted by
Azur
on October 8, 2005 at 5:22 AM
| link to this | reply
Best to ask those questions of the speech writers and not the ones giving the speeches! lol
posted by
Ca88andra
on October 7, 2005 at 11:36 PM
| link to this | reply
Hi MayB
I remember once telling you I just don't read the paper.
I simply couldn't wade through what you had to read to even begin to feel like I was getting the facts.
I like the cartoons though?
heh
Jo
posted by
brisbane_artist
on October 7, 2005 at 3:29 PM
| link to this | reply
>:-} Answers to that are probably about as plentiful as answers to
the question, "which came first... the carrot or the bunny!"
Most 'facts' usually line right up with the opinions of those who are presenting them - just like some 'facts' i recently presented... except my presentation was tongue in cheek and meant more for fun than anything.
posted by
wiserabbit
on October 7, 2005 at 10:34 AM
| link to this | reply
MayB very good post and question
We are only fed what they want to give us to push an agenda no matter what political party. Yesterday in my post on Bush and Iraq Army batallions he quoted one thing, a general quoted another and then a commentor said that the "general meant something else" how does the commentor know what the general meant?
posted by
scoop
on October 7, 2005 at 10:28 AM
| link to this | reply
MayB, this is exactly the reason that I never write on news and politics.
posted by
TAPS.
on October 7, 2005 at 10:24 AM
| link to this | reply
MayB , you have in your reply given me an important detail that I was not aware of. Thank you very much for that. You are quite already that supporters of either Bush or Clinton find nothing good in each other.I really like your objectivity. God Bless.
posted by
Flame-thrower
on October 7, 2005 at 8:10 AM
| link to this | reply
Take care...
posted by
_Symphony_
on October 7, 2005 at 7:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Quite interesting was your question, if I don't win him over into our fold, I still will love him as any other humanbeing, that is the teaching of Jesus Christ.Love your neighbour like your own self.
posted by
Flame-thrower
on October 7, 2005 at 5:43 AM
| link to this | reply
MayB...Bingo!
In regard to Bush, so many statements are elusive and presented in a sensationalized format or structure. Before giving a speech or before presenting a statement to the media I wish it were possible to present his feelings on a topic maybe in the form of an outline.
A. This is how I feel
B. This is how I intend to handle my feelings
C. And when he takes questions from the media, maybe tackle the question instead of dance around it.
Actually, this goes for all "speakers" or "presenters". I think that being politically correct all the time tends to make peole dance around the issue.
Great topic!
posted by
Masky
on October 7, 2005 at 4:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Rhetoric and rabbits will freeze in the headlights of the inquiring.
(PS, not our Blogit Rabbit of course)
posted by
_dave_says_ack_
on October 7, 2005 at 1:18 AM
| link to this | reply
I don't know if even Bush has those answers, but even if he does, we have there a prime example of how those in control often give the appearance of giving us information, when really, it's just a lot of smoke and mirrors in the name of damage control.
posted by
SilverMoon7
on October 7, 2005 at 1:05 AM
| link to this | reply
MayB, the news is more about 'reading people and happenings' than
conclusive, written down , recorded and filed facts anymore, like maj said.........patterns and shadows on the wall and finger puppets and Punch and Judy shows.......
posted by
benzinha
on October 7, 2005 at 12:48 AM
| link to this | reply
Isn't that the truth Spitfire? I read the transcript of the speech and thought about that.
posted by
Azur
on October 7, 2005 at 12:08 AM
| link to this | reply
Majroj, I never thought about it quite like that but yes I have to say that one does measure things against previous patterns. The difficulty is that some events and people defy all previous patterns
posted by
Azur
on October 6, 2005 at 11:53 PM
| link to this | reply
MayB,
I am often longing for the same answers, especially from Dubya. Unfortunately, I don't think he'll ever answer them b/c not even if his speech writer(s) can come up with anything.
posted by
SpitFire70
on October 6, 2005 at 11:51 PM
| link to this | reply
Now we deal in, if you will, "metafacts".
Sort of like a hologram.
The metafacts are "who said what, when, and to whom". We then compare and analyze these to see patterns. Are the speakers or writers being placating or pugancious to their friends, their enemies, or those whom they either need, or spurn?
As a hologram is an image derived from interference patterns from two lasers on one object (two points of view), the "interference patterns" of the aspects, and not so much the substance, of the speeches/press releases reveals more about what "they" are up to, thinking about.
The "prime facts" are lost.
posted by
majroj
on October 6, 2005 at 10:08 PM
| link to this | reply
I was just rambling on about being confused ;)
No wonder. How to find the truth when it is so swathed in tired platitudes, conflicting reports and endless spin...Wish I knew. Thought provoking post May.
posted by
Katray2
on October 6, 2005 at 9:59 PM
| link to this | reply