Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bushism on AAR

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:15 PM
Original message
Bushism on AAR

OK, I just listened to the "top of the hour" news, and they
played a clip where * tries to answer the question of a Native
American about tribal sovereignty in the 21st century. The
answer was priceless...

Was this recent?

Does anyone have a link?

In the middle of *'s tortured answer, you could actually hear
some of the audience start laughing, but clearly * is trying to
be serious.

Anyway, did anyone else catch this or is this old news?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
soleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. I heard it and I heard the laughter, I wonder if he did
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shoelace414 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. he was talking in front of the black reporters
or something like that. I remember because the morinig show (morning sedition?) had a joke about it.

"Black and Reporters? when is this election going to be over?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malatesta1137 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. yes I caught it
where can we get a transcript? It was hilarious. The American Indian reporter asked him about Indian sovereignty in the 21st century. *'s answer might have been his most tortured and retarded to date. The guy's definitely on acid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lanparty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. I thought it was hilarious ...
Edited on Fri Aug-06-04 12:26 PM by lanparty
...

Something tells me, Bush has had conversations like this.

Q: "How would you describe the color blue ...???"

A: "Well, you know it's blue. And when you look at it in the light, it's kinda bluish"


Q: "Who is the president of South Africa???"

A: "Well, he's the president of course. He's the man in charge. He's the head honcho. Ya see, he's the president."



Something deep down tells me that Bush doesn't know what sovereignty is or ....

Bush was being led into a corner on definitions of sovereignty for Indian tribes vs definitions of Sovereignty for Iraq. If he INTENTIONALLY went into "stupid mode" I give him credit for shrewdness.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. From the whitehouse transcript
Q Good morning. My name is Mark Trahant. I'm the editorial page editor of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and a member of the Native American Journalist Association. (Applause.) Most school kids learn about the government in the context of city, county, state and federal. And, of course, tribal governments are not part of that at all. Mr. President, you've been a governor and a President, so you have a unique experience, looking at it from two directions. What do you think tribal sovereignty means in the 21st century, and how do we resolve conflicts between tribes and the federal and the state governments?

THE PRESIDENT: Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a -- you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And, therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities.


------------------------------------------------------

now there WAS laughter right around the "you're viewed as a sovereign
entity" portion of the response (or, more accurately, non-response),
but I guess the WH doesn't transcribe everything!

The audio was great...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lefty_the_Right Donating Member (381 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. I think it's this one
UPDATE: The White House has the official transcript. And it notes a detail almost too sad to include here:

"We actually misnamed the war on terror, it ought to be the struggle against ideological extremists who do not believe in free societies who happen to use terror as a weapon to try to shake the conscience of the free world. (Laughter.)

No, that's what they do."
George W. Bush
http://www.wonkette.com/archives/bush-at-unity-conference-019032.php

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. LMAO... even the official WH transcript includes "laughter."
Edited on Fri Aug-06-04 12:31 PM by VolcanoJen
Heh heh heh...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lanparty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Here is how I DEFINE Indian sovereignty ...

I think all the Indian reservations should be made into a non-contiguous state. It's name would be Native America. It would have two Senators just like any other state.

To me, this is the ONLY way to settle the issue since states have ALWAYS usurped the sovereign rights of tribal lands. The only way to liberate the tribal lands from state dominion is to make them a state of their own accord.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosco T. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. agreeded.. except...
2 Senators for the Nation
1 representative PER TRIBE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Tribes do not fall under state jurisidiction. They are governed
under federal laws. I agree with the representation you suggest, but do not confuse the laws that govern Indian lands.

They are very independent from the states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lanparty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. They have to ask the state for gaming licenses ...

Yes, in many cases they ARE subject to state laws. Otherwise, they wouldn't have to bother asking the state of California for permission to run casino gambling on their "sovereign" lands.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Well, it makes sense that the California Gaming Commission
control and regulate the casinos in the state, whether they be indian or other private ownership. There is no such thing as the Federal Gaming Commission and I hope that one is never established!

Gaming must be regulated or the abuses would harm the citizens of the community, I much rather California Gaming Commission regulate casinos in the state than to see the establish of a Federal Gaming Commission.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. I don't think that would work.
The Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians have different needs and geographical issues problems than the Navajo Nation; I think each tribal region should be given separate representation in Congress if they so desire, but they may prefer things be left the way they are, the have enough trouble dealing with the BIA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleApple81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
10. THIS IS TODAY'S news. Unity speech. I have a thread with the link to CSpan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Thanks for the video link

His latest Bushism occurs at 32:54 into the video.

It's in realplayer and takes forever to load, but it's worth
it.

BTW, every issue to him is a "solemn duty" today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emboldened Chimp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
15. Is there ANY OTHER video of this besides CSPAN?
I can't get my real player to connect with CSPAN--been a problem for some time now. Is there video of this anywhere else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
17. I was watching "Outdoor Life Network" today
a show on George Greenough, and they showed a commercial of geedubya going fishing on one of those action-packed, suspense-filled fishing shows.

They showed a five-second clip of him saying something to the head fisher guy, and he had that obnoxious smirk on his face and that fake "trying to be nice to the little people" sound in his voice. I could not beleive it, all of that came through in a thirty second spot, this guy can't be human no matter what situation he is in.

They must be REALLY going after joe-sixpack, to have the pres. on a fishing show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Momof1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-04 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
18. Re Airing on C-Span in 40 mins....
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC