Bush was warned about the catostrophic danger of the levees being "topped"

Now, nevermind that the levees being breeched has been warned of for years, as one of the worst 3 disasters to face America (Bush is 2 out of 3 on the list, if I remember correctly). When was the first report that they had been breeched? Obviously "breeching" is worse than "topping" the levees, yet Bush ate cake and played guitar until he was shamed into doing photo ops to pretend like he was actually doing something.

This whole "breeched" vs. "topped" thing is a red herring. The results of both were predicted as catostrophic, and Bush should have... I don't know... done something about it.

Although, maybe he figured that he's fucked up everything else he touched so much that he thought it would be better to ignore the problem and let other people handle it...

Sounds like what the bull did to the cow.

:rofl:

Isn't funny how all the crap they threw at Bill Clinton now seems to be their rock solid defense of W and nothing can be his fault.

tuned right out.

Breached: levee or floodwall fails at one point allowing water to break through at that point. Topped: Water rises up to the top (duh), then continues to rise and flows over, like it does over the top of a dam. Witness the state of the Lower Ninth Ward and St. Bernard Parish (separate levee system was topped thanks to amplified storm surge from a nearby ship channel) versus the rest of the city (floodwalls breached in at least two places).

So if King Dumbass** had been warned about a possible topping, he was -- or should have been, if he weren't such a freaking moran :grr: - prepared for the worst.