I would like someone to point out where the proposal cuts Tsunami warning centers. That was the original accusation.
This was your point.
Am I reading this right? Are you admitting your first story was bullshit?
You, of course, don't pay attention to what one Republicans says:
KING: The tsunami warning centers, it’s really — the timing of that really puts attention on the subject matter. I don’t know that I would go back and look at that. I would ask people to come forward with the facts on this — how badly do we need them and do the tragic events in Japan give us a different perspective. I would look at it from a different perspective. I don’t know I would at this point know say that I’d be willing to make that change. I think we often over-react to emergencies, especially natural disasters,
Instead you dwell on Cantor's remarks, which are a bit more obscure in the Republican way of obtuse-speak:
"Nowhere have we indicated that we are directing NOAA not to emphasize the services it provides for the safety, wealth and welfare of American people," Cantor said. "We've all got to do more with less."
Real world translation:
We're gonna slash your budget. If you can't track hurricanes, tornadoes, or tsunamis it's not our fault. We told you to make do with your dime and didn't specifically say what to cut, cuz that's how we roll.
