"I Did Not Anticipate The Breaching Of That Woman, Ms. Levee"

Part of any new evidence emerging of wrongdoing on the part of the Bush administration is awaiting how his loyal supporters will spin a defense/distraction for him (ie. Fox News suggesting civil war in Iraq could have some unseen benefits!).

In regards to the videotape recently made public by the AP showing President Bush receiving a detailed briefing the day before Katrina hit on the extent of what the damage could be, the defense given back was two-fold. The White House first blew off the tape, releasing transcripts of a videoconference call and stating that the President was "fully engaged". Of course, we're apparently meant to take their word on that, since nothing we saw seems to support the notion that his mind was on anything other than his vacation (before the storm) and approval-saving photo-ops (after the storm). The second defense is one of semantics.

Supporters of the President insist the AP piece was biased against Bush (darn that radical Associated Press), even though video cannot lie. They stated that in the video, Bush is specifically warned that flooding may ensue in New Orleans when the levees are overtopped with water. Therefore, they insist, the President was not lying when he told Diane Sawyer on September 1st that "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees" (bold added by me). OMG, see! He never said anything about overtopping! It's, like, way different! These people forced an AP clarification and point back to it as a validation of this lame defense.

This is, as I said, all semantics. This is the Bill Clinton defense all over again(it all depends on what "is" is/blowjobs aren't sex)- bullshit wordplay which conservatives fumed at in '98/'99, but they now apparently embrace as airtight logic. As Lawrence O'Donnell said on yesterday's edition of KCRW's 'Left, Right, and Center', "This is a President who doesn't know the difference between the word 'Arab' and 'Muslim', do you really believe he knows the difference between 'topped' and 'breached' when discussing levees?"

Overtopping (which did occur at some levees, for the record) or breaching... it all means the same thing- a flooded New Orleans. The bottom line is that the tapes prove that the President was warned that the levees were a critical danger and that flooding would occur. His response was, of course, to stay on vacation and feign shock when it actually happened. Also, in his response to Diane Sawyer, the President clearly gave the impression that he did not anticipate the severity of the situation to any degree. He said that he didn't think "anybody" had anticipated it (this is definitely a lie). He also made no distinction on what warnings he received- the impression he wanted viewers to be left with was that no one anticipated, to any extent, the damage that had occurred in New Orleans. This impression was, yes, a lie. Besides that briefing we saw in the AP, numerous other experts (on the Weather Channel, etc) gave far-in-advance warnings that the levees would not hold and that water would enter the city. The President did not heed these warnings and failed in his leadership duties after the storm. No wordplay can change that reality.

Considering all the evidence to the contrary, if the President does continue to insist that the breaching wasn't anticipated by him, then either he is a liar or a complete buffoon. You can take your pick, I suppose.