Bush Speaks Like A President Today

[berni_mccoy]

Bush said he does *not* know Abramoff.
Just like Clinton said he did not have sex with Monica.

I bet Bush will ask us to define the term "KNOW" (biblical or dictionary :rofl:)

Bush also said he did *not* break the law.
Just like Nixon said he was *not* a crook.

Still waiting for the resignation phase...

Yep, this guy's definitely presidential material. Freepers should be proud, Proud, PROUD!

:rofl:

[woodsprite]

1. You *KNOW* I've been reading DU too much

when I just read this subject line and read it as "Bush Lies like a President Today". UGH!

[CoolOnion]

2. I noticed that!

I thought of "I am not a crook" right away! And you know what they say about "framing" an issue--when you restate something in the negative, all the viewers hear is what the speaker is trying to deny--crook, Abramoff, "break the law."

Looks like he's gearing up for resignation to me! :toast:

[peekaloo]

3. I have my pichur took with a lot of people.

But how many get an invite to Compound W? Or at least as Rovers' escort.

[CottonBear]

4. Compound W! LOL!

:rofl:

Seriously though, Bush* is a fucking idiot. It is beyond painful to lsiten to his attempts at logical and truthful speechifying. :(

[H2O Man]

5. It was an amazing press conference.

The high point for Bush was when the hanging microphone distracted attention from his message; it went downhill for him from there on out.

[donheld]

6. "Bush said he does *not* know Abramoff."

Maybe when he said that he's talking about knowing him in a biblical sense.

[Buns_of_Fire]

7. Gotta reparse it a little, then: "Bush said he does not *KNOW* Abramoff."

Well, of course he probably does not KNOW Abramoff in a biblical sense -- certainly not any more, that's for sure. Now, if he said, "I *did* not KNOW Abramoff" or "I *never* KNEW Abramoff" -- then we're talking past tense, whereupon some nefarious individual (hey, not ME, okay? O8) ) could imply that, while Numnutz doesn't know "Big A" NOW, he HAS "known" him in the past, and that sentence as originally written is probably truthful while not quite telling the whole story.

All bets are off, of course, if either (or both) of them were ever habitues of the baths in the Bay area where I understand there were such things as "glory holes" where you could KNOW someone without KNOWING them. :shrug:

There. I trust everything is cleared up now. :-)