As found in the current issue of The New Republic, (June 10, 2002):

[quote] “During a discussion between President George W. Bush. . . and [Brazilian President] Fernando Henrique Cardoso . . . Bush stunned his counterpart with the question: ‘Do you have blacks, too?’ [National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice], who noticed how astounded the Brazilian was by the question, saved the situation by explaining to Bush: ‘Mr. President, Brazil probably has more blacks than the U.S.A.; it is said to have more black people than any country outside Africa.’ Brazil’s President Cardoso later deemed that with regard to Latin America, Bush is ‘still learning.’” From Der Spiegel, May 19, 2002 (translated from the German)

---

Sad. Just sad.

[ June 11, 2002: Message edited by: Lots-of-us ]

Worries me more that we're solving the 'nine levels of bureaucracy' problem in the FBI by adding another level of bureaucracy: a cabinet-level Homeland Security Office. Shouldn't we make the other levels work instead - or eliminate a few? I thought that was the president's job. If everything is delegated maybe we should elect the delegatee to hold the office of the person who keeps delegating - that would eliminate some bureaucracy at least.

Crowley for president!?

Of course, www.snopes.com, the Urban Legends debunker page, thinks there is good reason to believe this alleged "quote" falls into the category of "urban legend."

LINK TO THE SNOPES PAGE

It has all the hallmarks of a phoney story. What a shock that the Bush-hating euro-elite and the Al Gore in-house campaign newsletter (a.k.a, "The New Republic") would publish such unverified crap.

And check out the rest of the snopes site too ... the one about George W. Bush waving at Stevie Wonder ... that's a lie, too ... urban legend ... never happened.

[quote]Originally posted by Charlie in the Trees:
What a shock that the Bush-hating euro-elite and the Al Gore in-house campaign newsletter (a.k.a, "The New Republic") would publish such unverified crap.

---

I'd like to see the wider context of The New Republic article. As Snopes indicates on its page, the larger context can be important. From what has been reported here, One can almost imagine that The New Republic is commenting on the nature of international journalism and how filtering an event through three different language barriers almost certainly eliminates any semblance of meaning.
On the other hand, they may be using any excuse they can think of to bust Bush's chops.

Here's the article from the _Post_.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...8-2002Jun4.html

>>
What Did He Say and When Did He Say It?

• In the Loop
Wednesday, June 5, 2002; Page A21

Some well-known Democrats have been flogging a recent Der Spiegel item that said President Bush had asked Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, "Do you have blacks, too?"

Cardoso, a sociologist by training, was reported to have been stunned. National security adviser Condoleezza Rice is said to have quickly interjected: "Mr. President, Brazil has probably more blacks than the United States. Some say it is the country with the most blacks outside of Africa."

The item has been buzzing around the Internet, though it seemed most curious how Der Spiegel alone somehow uncovered this supposed Bush gaffe. The item also appeared jumbled. Cardoso, a pal and admirer of former president Bill Clinton, said Bush was "still in training" when it came to Latin America, but that was recently and not in a private conversation with Bush.

Upon some checking, it appears that, in March 2001, at the first White House meeting of Bush and Cardoso, there was discussion of the two countries as melting pots, one participant said, but he did not recall Bush's question.

The White House last week dismissed the report as "total crap." The Brazilian Embassy didn't return a call.

Yesterday, we found that the item actually came from an April 28 column by Fernando Pedreira, former executive editor and now columnist for the Estado Sao Paulo, a respected paper in Brazil. The column is headlined "An Overwhelming Ignorance."

Pedreira is very close to Cardoso, who had named him the country's ambassador to UNESCO. Meanwhile, Cardoso is said to have mentioned his chats with Bush while he was on a weekend with some close friends recently in Rio.

The White House yesterday repeated its pithy assessment of the report.
<<

[ June 10, 2002: Message edited by: twin58 ]

[quote]Originally posted by twin58:


The White House last week dismissed the report as "total crap." The Brazilian Embassy didn't

---

I realize everyday brings unwarranted and unwelcome attacks to any White House, attacks they legitimately may consider beyond reason. And this attack may be one of those. However, it is inexcusable for a White House official, speaking on behalf of the president to call any news report "crap."

That just goes to show how the word "crap" is just part of the vernacular now. What's the difference if the spokesperson said it was "total crap" instead of "total garbage"? And the source of this story seems very suspect.

But people ought to stop focusing on dumb comments, real or imagined, and worry about the actions and policies of the administration.

Tom Ridge's Color-coded Homeland Security chart...it's crap-tacular!

RERUM FECUM

In third grade, 1960, my first year in a public school after "getting out of" Catholic school, I once told a kid that he was "full of crap" for telling some ridiculous story. You should have seen the shit hit the fan - and the teacher hit the roof! She launched into a tirade about how unruly kids from Catholic schools were generally, and I was in particular. I didn't see any problem with the expression. Hell, we used it around our house all the time. I mean, hey, what the f&*k? Jesus Christ!

Flash forward to Dianne Feinstein's second term as Mayor of SF - yes, the one in which she allowed the so-called "homeless" to take over our parks and then conveniently split for Washington leaving a former social worker to do even less about the problem. She and her former morning jogging pal, former City Atty. Louise Renne, were involved in some pissing contest about something that definitely had put a cramp in their friendship. At one point, Feinstein was reported as labeling something someone said in the affair "a bunch of dreck, which is Yiddish for crap. Her outburst made a brief splash in the local press.

And now we have crap emanating from the White House and worry that it might be reducing it to the status of an outhouse. Not to worry, crapophobia is not the answer. The term is a relatively mild one, as indicated not just by my longterm use of it, but by its generalized acceptance in political circles preceding this administration. Recall the 16th century English poem, "Shitten Is Shittes, From Which All Shitten Comes," surely a smutty piece if there ever was one. Simply, if not Swiftly, put, we should be thankful for crap and the place is occupies in our lexicon. We could all be dooing a lot worse.

Re: crap and the White House.

Recalling an old anecdote, I searched at Google for "bess truman manure."

The website http://www.mofga.org/fb_05act.html reports that MOFGA, the Maine Organic Famers and Gardeners Association, will be holding a Harry S. Truman Manure Pitch-Off. Yes, they have a period after the "S;" take it up with them. The site continues:

>>
Fairgoers often ask, "Why Harry S. Truman?" We got the answer from Pitch-Off founder Mort Mather. Apparently, a friend in the Truman social circle once urged Bess, "You really have to get Harry to stop saying 'manure' all the time." Bess replied, "You have no idea how long I've been trying to get him to start."
<<

How telling that the White House would try to dismiss this story summarily as "crap." Whatever they don't like, they just either ignore, deride or try to turn around as a smear, as Cheney did when both Republicans and Democrats began to press for information on what the White House did and didn't know before September 11, 2002. And why isn't there MORE investigation of Cheney's having done ZERO on the counterterrorism panel he was supposed to have chaired at the same time as he was running that giveaway for the energy lobby? More silence, stonewalling, and smearing will come, unless John Asscroft announces yet another miraculous "capture" of a suspected terrorist, I guess. How suspicious: first, we hear that there is info that this José Padilla/Al Muhajir was suppposed to have been planning a "dirty bomb"/radiological weapon, then the various spokespeople start backing away from the specifics....wake up, America! Enough sleepwalking. As for the new big-budget program, aren't the Republicans the party of "small government"? Why is Bush now adopting a bad program that Joseph Lieberman, of all people, had proposed??? Why not CLEAN HOUSE, INTEGRATE AND STREAMLINE the intelligence agencies that already exist?

As for this most recent Bushism, the article originally was reported by the Estado de São Paulo writer, and was picked up by Der Spiegel, and now the center-right New Republic has glommed onto it. But does Bush's ignorance about the world--Brazil, which has the largest population of people of African descent OUTSIDE Africa--surprise ANYONE at this point? I mean, really, come on. I don't even criticize the man anymore on this account, because it's not his fault he's in office, it's the fault of the American people, who allowed a Supreme Court coup to put him there without ever challenging the unconstitutionality of what occurred. Our Congress and we, the citizenry, dropped the ball. So whatever comes out of his mouth--"Axis of Evil," the constant flubs, etc.--is on us as much as him. At least now he knows that Brazil has a "lot of Blacks"--the Brazilian president himself has "African ancestry," as he noted a few years ago.

I like this latest crap from the W.H.:

"Open mouth. Insert loafer. In a stunning (well, really, is it?) admission, chief W.H. flack Ari Fleischer 'fessed up yesterday: Pres. Bush didn't actually read a 268-page federal report that blamed global warming on oil refineries, cars and people.

Still, his boss dissed the report last week.

"I read the report put out by the bureaucracy," Bush said, before reiterating his opposition to the international Kyoto treaty on global warming that the U.S. refuses to sign.

"Whenever Presidents say they read it, you can read that to be he was briefed," Fleischer answered when asked if Bush had read the report.

Then he suddenly realized that, perhaps, he had been just a tad too frank and open.

"I've enjoyed working here, thank you," he told the White House gaggle of reporters to hoots of laughter.

New York Daily News

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
How telling that the White House would try to dismiss this story summarily as "crap." Whatever they don't like, they just either ignore, deride or try to turn around as a smear, as Cheney did when both Republicans and Democrats began to press for information on what the White House did and didn't know before September 11, 2002.

As for this most recent Bushism, the article originally was reported by the Estado de São Paulo writer, and was picked up by Der Spiegel, and now the center-right New Republic has glommed onto it. But does Bush's ignorance about the world--Brazil, which has the largest population of people of African descent OUTSIDE Africa--surprise ANYONE at this point?

---

Best I can tell from all of this, fantomas thinks that, even if this quote story is untrue, the Bush Administration should be ashamed of itself for dismissing the story is untrue, because fantomas thinks other things President Bush and his administration have said are untrue, which therefore makes them unqualified to dismiss any story as untrue. And even if the quote is inaccurate, fantomas seems to believe, the quote confirms fantomas's beliefs about President Bush, and therefore the quote is accurate, even if it is inaccurate, because to fantomas it accurately depicts what fantomas believes to be accurate.

However, I predict that fantomas will not like my interpretion of his post, and will therefore just either ignore it, deride it or try to turn it around as a smear. He will do all of this sometime before September 11, 2002, the days before which fantomas seems to think Bush either does or does not know something.

[ June 11, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]

Also, if I'm not mistaken, isn't The New Republic the magazine that published all of Stephen Glass's phony articles? About the 5-year-old internet executive and some church that worhips George H.W. Bush? If I recall correctly, TNR's fact-checking leaves something to be desired.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, aren't the Germans the ones who allowed Hitler's rise to power? I don't think they can be trusted, either.

Aren't the Bushes the ones who have been in bed with the bin Ladens for decades?

Yalie terrorists.

[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
Aren't the Bushes the ones who have been in bed with the bin Ladens for decades?

---

No, not that I know of.

[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
Aren't the Bushes the ones who have been in bed with the bin Ladens for decades?

---

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
No, not that I know of.

---

Uh-oh. Get thee to the website of my favorite conspiracy theorist, Alex Jones.

http://www.infowars.com

http://www.infowars.com/resources.html

http://www.infowars.com/resources.html#BUSH_LINK

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0141/gray.php

>>
Legal Group Blasts Papa Shrub on Bin Laden Link
Bush Sr. Could Profit From War
by Geoffrey Gray

Larry Klayman likes suing the United States government. Over the last seven years as chairman and general counsel of Judicial Watch, a public interest law firm in Washington, he has filed over 150 lawsuits against the feds, including more than 80 against former president Bill Clinton himself. Called the Ralph Nader of the right, Klayman has litigation habits considered by some Beltway insiders as wildly ambitious. Others think he's just plain crazy.
But now Klayman and Judicial Watch are pawing in disbelief through President George W. Bush's past business connections with the Saudi-based Bin Laden family. The firm is demanding that GWB's father, the original President Bush, immediately resign from his post as a paid senior adviser to the Carlyle Group, a private Washington equity firm that according to The New York Times has essentially become the nation's 11th largest defense contractor.

Carlyle's investors include the Bin Laden family, which has disowned its terrorist son Osama; Bush Sr.; and former Bush inner guard members Nick Carlucci and James Baker. Judicial Watch says all involved stand to benefit from any increase in U.S. defense spending.

"It's mind-boggling," says Klayman. "This conflict of interest has now turned into a scandal." With the recent U.S. air strikes in Afghanistan, Klayman says, the conflict of interest is now "direct."

Klayman questions why Bush the Younger is not aggressively pursuing Saudi Arabia, a country known to harbor terrorists. He points to Bush the Elder's business connections there, like the Saudi-based Bin Laden family, through Carlyle. "President Bush should not ask, but demand, that his father pull out of the Carlyle Group," says Klayman.

Neither former president Bush—who has continued advising his son on handling the war on terrorism—nor the Carlyle Group returned calls seeking comment.

In a case of "like father, like son," President Bush also had connections to the Carlyle Group, the Voice has learned. In the years before his 1994 bid for Texas governor, Bush owned stock in and sat on the board of directors of Caterair, a service company that provided airplane food and was also a component of Carlyle. For his consulting position, Bush was paid $15,000 a year, according to a Texas insider, and a bonus $1000 for every meeting he attended—roughly $75,000 in total. Reports show Carlyle was also a major contributor to his electoral fund.

Upon hearing about the Bush-Bin Laden family connection, other Washington nonprofits have joined Judicial Watch in expressing their concern.

"Carlyle is as deeply wired into the current administration as they can possibly be," Charles Lewis, executive director of the Center for Public Integrity, told Bushwatch.org. "George Bush is getting money from private interests that have business before the government, while his son is president. And, in a really peculiar way, George W. Bush could, some day, benefit financially from his own administration's decisions, through his father's investments. The average American doesn't know that. To me, that's a jaw-dropper."
<<

http://www.judicialwatch.org/1082.shtml

>>
Nov 27, 2001 Contact: Press Office
202-646-5172

JUDICIAL WATCH TO FILE FOIA LAWSUIT TODAY OVER CARLYLE GROUP DOCUMENTS

Former President Bush Works for International Investment Firm With Ties To Saudi Arabia

Company Had Previously Worked with Bin Laden Family Conglomerate

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today announced that it would be filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State and Defense Departments in order to obtain documents concerning the Carlyle Group, an international consulting and investment firm which retains former President George H.W. Bush.

The Wall Street Journal reported in September that the former president, the father of President Bush, worked for the bin Laden family business in Saudi Arabia through the Carlyle Group. The senior Bush had met with the bin Laden family at least twice. (Other top Republicans are also associated with the Carlyle group, such as former Secretary of State James A. Baker.) The terrorist leader Osama bin Laden had supposedly been “disowned” by his family, which runs a multi-billion dollar business in Saudi Arabia and was a major investor in the senior Bush’s firm. Other reports have questioned whether members of his Saudi family have truly cut off Osama bin Laden. Osama’s sister-in-law, in a recent interview with ABC News, said that she believed that members of her family still supported bin Laden.

In the wake of Judicial Watch and other criticism of its ties to the bin Laden family business, the Carlyle Group reportedly no longer does business with the bin Laden conglomerate. Yet it has also been reported that the Group has had significant business contacts with the Saudi Arabian government, which many have criticized for its lack of diligence in reigning in bin Laden and its tepid support for America’s war against terrorism.
....
<<

Alex Jones is intensely right-wing, and Larry Klayman is hardly a commie either.

Alex Jones may be heard on the shortwave every night at 5085 kHz and 6890 kHz.

[ June 11, 2002: Message edited by: twin58 ]

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
Also, if I'm not mistaken, aren't the Germans the ones who allowed Hitler's rise to power? I don't think they can be trusted, either.

---

Okay, if you want to drag in Hitler, the Nazis and Germany, according to authors Loftus-Aarons and Tarpley-Chaitkin, Prescott S. Bush, later U.S. Senator from Connecticut, father of George H. W. Bush and grandfather of George W. Bush, served on the board of the Union Bank, a Harriman concern, which helped to raise money for the National Socialist Party and its SS troops; it was in violation of the Trading with the Enemy Act and was seized in 1942 by the U.S. government, then AT WAR with Nazi Germany. Two other Bush-led businesses, Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation , also were seized because they were believed to be Third Reich fronts. A fourth, Silesian-American, eventually was seized as well. Moreover, Bush allegedly only divested well after the U.S. had won the War against the Axis powers. (The Rockefellers and Joseph Kennedy also profited from Nazi contacts, so it wasn't just Prescott Bush.)

Sarasota Daily Herald
Tarpley & Chaikin Book
More
Draheim-Libertarian Page

William, by inference are you now saying that all the conservative organs David "The Hysterical Liar" Brock wrote for--THE WASHINGTON TIMES, THE NATIONAL REVIEW, etc.--should be dismissed because of his trangressions? I think not. Is DER SPIEGEL a Nazi paper? Was it EVER? How can you by inference smear ESTADO DE SÃO PAULO?

Look, if Bush didn't utter this, he didn't utter this. I tend to think he did. I stated that it wasn't a big deal for me, because it's typical of what comes out of his mouth. I also tend to distrust most of what comes out of Ari Fleischer's mouth, since he dissembles and outright lies so frequently it's breathtaking. He either avoids answering questions or just embroiders the truth or dissimulates without blinking an eye.

BTW, any news about that anti-terrorism panel VP Cheney was supposed to be heading up?

[ June 11, 2002: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Extra post-deleted

[ June 11, 2002: Message edited by: fantomas ]

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
I also tend to distrust most of what comes out of Ari Fleischer's mouth, since he dissembles and outright lies so frequently it's breathtaking. He either avoids answering questions or just embroiders the truth or dissimulates without blinking an eye

---

Dude, you just quoted the job description. Don't you watch "West Wing?" Were you listening at all during the last oh, 3 administrations?

JQueer, I don't watch "West Wing," even though Martin Sheen and Rob Lowe are on it. Yes, I know that dissembling is part of the job description, but Fleischer has taken it to a new level. He makes Marlin Fitzwater look like George Washington.

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
William, by inference are you now saying that all the conservative organs David "The Hysterical Liar" Brock wrote for--THE WASHINGTON TIMES, THE NATIONAL REVIEW, etc.--should be dismissed because of his trangressions? I think not. Is DER SPIEGEL a Nazi paper? Was it EVER? How can you by inference smear ESTADO DE SÃO PAULO?

---

Goddam. Calm down. I was joking about the Nazi thing. Clearly I don't hold that against Germany any more than I hold communism against modern-day Russia. Jeez.

Look, no need to start cursing. You brought up the Nazis, not me.

BTW, speaking of Communism, why is there so little discussion of CHINA's Communism, which continues to oppress millions of people? Chinese has slave labor factories, it illegally occupies Tibet, it violently supresses dissent both within its borders and in Hong Kong, and it continues to harass two sovereign countries that are our staunch allies, Taiwan and Japan. China's situation strikes me as far more dangerous than Cuba or GDP-less North Korea, yet we continue to dance around China.

Clinton swung like a seesaw, at times getting tough with China and withholding goodies, while also possibly accepting illegal campaign contributions from the Chinese government. Is it because of the vast economic opportunity trading with this Communist country provides us? Can't we help to push them towards democracy, or at least more democratic socialism?

[quote]Originally posted by fantomas:
Look, no need to start cursing. You brought up the Nazis, not me.

BTW, speaking of Communism, why is there so little discussion of CHINA's Communism, which continues to oppress millions of people? Chinese has slave labor factories, it illegally occupies Tibet, it violently supresses dissent both within its borders and in Hong Kong, and it continues to harass two sovereign countries that are our staunch allies, Taiwan and Japan. China's situation strikes me as far more dangerous than Cuba or GDP-less North Korea, yet we continue to dance around China.

Clinton swung like a seesaw, at times getting tough with China and withholding goodies, while also possibly accepting illegal campaign contributions from the Chinese government. Is it because of the vast economic opportunity trading with this Communist country provides us? Can't we help to push them towards democracy, or at least more democratic socialism?

---

First, I don't think of "goddam" as a curse. "God damn it" would be a curse. If you heard me speak it, you'd know the difference. If I'm in traffic and somebody cuts me off, I'd say, "God damn it" or "God damned motherf*$&er" and be cursing. If I'm watching a baseball game and somebody hits an enormous homerun, I might say "Goddam!" and not be cursing. Or if somebody takes me too seriously, I might say, "Goddam, lighten up" and not be cursing. There are similar nuances to "Son of a bitch" and "Sonofabitch" as well - the cursing variety is generally preceeded by "God damned", the non-cursing sort is more of an expression of surprise or exasperation. There's a difference. I would never say either in front of children because they don't have the brains to get the difference. All of this is, I suspect, a southern thing that you may or may not understand. If you don't, feel free to say "What in the hell is he talking about?" because in this situation you won't be cursing.

Now on to the Commies. To me this exchange seemed limited to my (tongue-in-cheek) blaming of Germany for it's Nazi past, which to me seems similar to Russia's commie past. China is trapped in the communist present, therefore a comparison didn't seem apt. But if I seemed soft on communism, I apologize. If there's any way it could be done, I would love for the U.S. to invade Cuba and China. Cuba, of course, would be easier, and more gratifying, I think, because at least the Chinese communists aren't as goddamned ugly as that son of a bitch Fidel Castro. (Sorry, communism makes me curse.)