The Language game...

Language is an interesting thing. It has subtle nuances that allow for different interpretations as such greats as Shakespeare and Carlin have shown. Yet there are some things that are apparent beyond the language, and when these things are addressed in sheer rhetoric the overall picture is lost.

I came across this link on Petterico.com (http://patterico.com/2006/03/02/4279/la-times-dishonestly-portrays-contents-of-video-in-which-bush-is-warned-about-katrina/) another pro-Bush conservative website. I give him props for at least addressing the Bush video story and not dipping his head in the sand like so many others. Of course he puts his particular spin on the issue, focusing primarily on language.

He has a copy of the transcript of the tape (http://patterico.com/2006/03/02/4279/la-times-dishonestly-portrays-contents-of-video-in-which-bush-is-warned-about-katrina/), and uses it to say that the LATimes report that Bush lied about anticipating the breach of the levees, is untrue because the word "breach" was never used, but instead they were worried about the levees "topping."

I read over the transcript and yes, this is true. But what is also true, is that in the same transcript Bush is also told by National Hurricane Center's Dr. Max Mayfield:

"Right now this is a Category 5 hurricane, very similar to Hurricane Andrew in maximum intensity, but there is a big big difference. This hurricane is larger than Andrew ever was."

He goes on to say:

"I also want to make absolutely clear that clear to everyone that the greatest loss of life is still in the coastal range from the storm's surge."

Money shot:

"The big question is going to be: Will that top some of the levees? And the current track and the forecast we have now suggest that there will be minimal flooding in the City of New Orleans itself, but we're -- we've always said that the storm surge model is only accurate within about 20 percent."

So yes, in language, if the President was a machine or a moron, he couldn't have anticipated a "breach," but only a "topping." But if we look at the big picture, one can only wonder, with the evidence presented, and the US Corps of Engineers report that said that the levee system was out of date for the last 10 years, how no one could have not inferred that the levees could break. If I told you, "If you get in the ring with Mike Tyson, he might knock you out and there's a 20 % chance that he could kill you," and you got in the ring, and he knocked your head clean off, and in heaven you said, "man I had no idea he could tear my head off my body!" St. Peter would roll his eyes in dismay. The difference in the language used is trivial. The fact is that more than enough information was provided for every one to know that a) there was a chance of the levees breaking, and b) Federal Aid was positively needed, and people would die if it wasn't provided.

Then again, to infer something requires thought and energy, and both seem to be lacking with this President.