Politics: J'accuse!

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
This is a trick question. You are such a moron that not only did you fail to anticipate this obvious question, but you also can't even hire people (or hire people who hire people) smart enough to anticipate this question.

What do I get as a prize? I think I should get extra for spotting the trick.

I don't let socks fuck with me, until they've been nice to me for 3 months straight, minimum.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I don't let socks fuck with me, until they've been nice to me for 3 months straight, minimum.

I wasn't calling YOU, Hank, moron, I was calling the hypo "you" a moron.

Now how about some Hanky-Panky?

[ltl/fb]

Nancy R. vetoes RR University:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/04....ap/index.html

Don't fret, club, I'm sure they will both die in plenty of time for your kids to go to RRU. Maybe if you are lucky, it will even have gotten accreditation by then!

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Nancy R. vetoes RR University:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/04....ap/index.html

Don't fret, club, I'm sure they will both die in plenty of time for your kids to go to RRU. Maybe if you are lucky, it will even have gotten accreditation by then!

I'm hoping RR makes it to 1/1/05

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Hypo:

Most responses I've seen to this center, not on his honesty, or how he should have said "x", but on how his failure to have a canned answer shows that he is not truly "presidential" in some way. Meaning, of course, that sincerity plays second fiddle to "playing the game correctly".

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
Most responses I've seen to this center, not on his honesty, or how he should have said "x", but on how his failure to have a canned answer shows that he is not truly "presidential" in some way. Meaning, of course, that sincerity plays second fiddle to "playing the game correctly".

His failure (and the failure of his entire staff, apparently) to anticipate an obvious consequence of calling a press conference on terror stuff is merely a failure to have a "canned" answer? Shit, the kid next door who got dropped on his head is sincere as hell in his reaction to there being dog crap on his shoe, even though he was looking straight down at the ground as he stepped in it.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
His failure (and the failure of his entire staff, apparently) to anticipate an obvious consequence of calling a press conference on terror stuff is merely a failure to have a "canned" answer? Shit, the kid next door who got dropped on his head is sincere as hell in his reaction to there being dog crap on his shoe, even though he was looking straight down at the ground as he stepped in it.

The question wasn't obvious, and almost all potential answers have to be weighted against whether he is really blaming someone else, and whether the "admission" isn't harmful strategically.

Example: one Mistake is we kept some innocent non-dangerous people in Gitmo (note I'm not trying to sound marine, I just don't have clue 1 how to even approximate the spelling).

how does Bush say " we kept some people we shouldn't have kept." Really he's blaming some intelligence officer.

" I thought there were WMD in iraq." Now this is what the reporter wanted, but this isn't really a mistake- everyone else did too.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
The question wasn't obvious, and almost all potential answers have to be weighted against whether he is really blaming someone else, and whether the "admission" isn't harmful strategically.

Example: one Mistake is we kept some innocent non-dangerous people in Gitmo (note I'm not trying to sound marine, I just don't have clue 1 how to even approximate the spelling).

how does Bush say " we kept some people we shouldn't have kept." Really he's blaming some intelligence officer.

" I thought there were WMD in iraq." Now this is what the reporter wanted, but this isn't really a mistake- everyone else did too.

The question is only non-obvious if you have such hubris that it doesn't occur to you, despite bazillions of media articles and polls/results and rallies both within your own country and abroad, that someone might your actions.

He has a zillion people, at least some of whom are supposed to be clever and facile and verbally talented, working for him.

Apparently either no one thought of this or the people who did think of this didn't manage to get him to pay attention. These are the people he likes on his team. You should go apply for a job.

[Antiquity]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Hypo:

Okay, you're the President and you're having a press conference. You're asked a question you hadn't anticipated at all, but not just any question, the question is:

Can you name (read admit) to one fuck up in fighting terrorists who are attacking your country.


Now, add 1 more fact, you're not like the guy you beat in the election (prediction SS will quote this then post "McCain"?) who would recycle some canned answer to some other question. No. Your style is to actually try and answer a question posed to you.

So rather than saying "no" which is of course impossible, you try and turn the question in your mind to get an answer.

Okay- What else should he have done? quickly made up a mistake? take a complex issue and turn it into a sound byte?

please- I know that part of the press conference is so telling to the 30% of the country that thinks like Ty, but what does it really show?

I thought the reference to questions he didn't answer was to his inability to explain why he and Cheney were appearing before the commission together. He just plain ducked it, twice.

Halfway to 30-6.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
The question wasn't obvious, and almost all potential answers have to be weighted against whether he is really blaming someone else, and whether the "admission" isn't harmful strategically.

Example: one Mistake is we kept some innocent non-dangerous people in Gitmo (note I'm not trying to sound marine, I just don't have clue 1 how to even approximate the spelling).

how does Bush say " we kept some people we shouldn't have kept." Really he's blaming some intelligence officer.

" I thought there were WMD in iraq." Now this is what the reporter wanted, but this isn't really a mistake- everyone else did too.

If he had an answer thought out beforehand, he would have been excoriated for "canned answers", and points would have been made all over about how he felt the need to come up with an answer to "how have you failed", which, clearly, would prove that he DID feel he had failed.

There is simply no winning this "do you still beat your wife" scenario.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore

There is simply no winning this "do you still beat your wife" scenario.

I know the contexts are different, but isn't the question a bit more like the old interview q: "what's your biggest weakness as an employee"?

The right answer is not "I don't have any" but rather, to chew your lip, hem, haw, and come up with something that sounds like a weakness but is actually something that's not. Such as "I have a hard time stopping working"; or "rather than delegate, I do a lot of the work myself."

There were three answers to the question:

1) Identify an actual mistake, which doesn't fly.

2) Claim no mistakes, which apparently didn't fly

3) Come up with a "mistake" that's not really one, which either they couldn't do or Bush or his staff rejected.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I know the contexts are different, but isn't the question a bit more like the old interview q: "what's your biggest weakness as an employee"?

I had that exact thought as I hit "send." I've never been able to handle that question well. Last time I was asked that, I looked at the person, and said that I had no idea how to answer in a way that wasn't going to seem contrived or pre-planned, and so maybe that ought to be my answer by itself.

(I got the job, so maybe I didn't totally fuck it up.)

But the most workable answer (your "c" option) really is a contrived, pre-planned yellback, that gives us no substantive information and merely shows that the answerer knows how to dance the dance. What good is that, for anyone? What does it say about people who criticize that he didn't do that? I think it's entirely form over substance, and it just makes a fun point of critique for people who would be criticizing his breathing patterns if that's all they had to work with.

[Antiquity]

Originally posted by bilmore
But the most workable answer (your "c" option) really is a contrived, pre-planned yellback, that gives us no substantive information and merely shows that the answerer knows how to dance the dance. What good is that, for anyone?

And this is unlike Bush's other answers how? He came to the press conference with a series of talking points, and answered most every question by falling back on that script.

To be sure, some of the questions were lousy. To spread the blame for this, Bush doesn't entertain follow-ups, which encourages bad questions.

And he just flat-out didn't answer the question about why he was going to appear in front of the commission with Cheney.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
I had that exact thought as I hit "send." I've never been able to handle that question well. Last time I was asked that, I looked at the person, and said that I had no idea how to answer in a way that wasn't going to seem contrived or pre-planned, and so maybe that ought to be my answer by itself.

(I got the job, so maybe I didn't totally fuck it up.)

But the most workable answer (your "c" option) really is a contrived, pre-planned yellback, that gives us no substantive information and merely shows that the answerer knows how to dance the dance. What good is that, for anyone? What does it say about people who criticize that he didn't do that? I think it's entirely form over substance, and it just makes a fun point of critique for people who would be criticizing his breathing patterns if that's all they had to work with.

I had no idea that you'd ever held the position of head of state of arguably (or perhaps inarguably) the most powerful country in the known universe. That is so cool that you can get it just by interviewing!!! Where do I sign up for the interview? Is there like a screening phone interview first, and then the interview where they ask "hard" questions?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore


But the most workable answer (your "c" option) really is a contrived, pre-planned yellback, that gives us no substantive information and merely shows that the answerer knows how to dance the dance. What good is that, for anyone?

There is no substance, but that's the art of being a politician. Everyone has a style of doing it--RR used the ol' "I can't hear you over the din of Marine One" JFK used the "Was my hair really that black?"

The best answer is the dodge that no one remembers. Perhaps Bush's biggest mistake was doing more than simply responding "Well, I don't think we've made any mistakes, at least none comes to mind. Obviously people can second guess after the fact, but that's not really fair to call things mistakes in hindsight. Next question."

I agree that the criticism is unwarranted, particularly because it wasn't a dodge on substance (unlike Kerry's or, even, the wife beating question, if there's proof of wife beating).