Again the unusual defense of Reps and Bush. Hey I agree that there were a host of issues that were missed by Dems as much as Reps, but that does not magically let the Reps (who are responsible) of the hook.
The Bush administration would know they couldn't push that forward. Their ties to big oil, Haliburon, etc. There is no way the president or congress would, even with majority Republicans, stand against the Dems attack on an appropriations bill for levee repair. They would know that the Dems would successfully kill the bill in the media by claiming it to be an appropriations bill for big oil).
This seems to be BS. How could the Dems stop it? You say they could go to the media and say something? Say what? What on earth have they said, or could they say, that would change a majority Rep vote in Congress?
That is on top of the fact that there would be no reason for Dems (at the very least within that state) to turn it down or vocally advocate against it. That would be money and protection for them!
But even if you put aside politics, surely someone would have this info at the New York times editorial staff? Why weren’t there any liberals in the news corp asking the administration about NO during news conferences? Why?
Could it be that its because the media has been so passive in recent years, afraid to touch this administration for fear of reprisals, that it was unwilling to ask questions about it?
Could it be that news has become more or less infotainment anyway, and so the hurricane was not a real issue until it hit? But in contrast to your statement, I did hear people asking about resources at the dome... unfortunately not to anyone important and that could answer the questions definitively.
Can't we and "they" be "us" on this one?
All political spectrums get hit on this. However that should not make it as everyone in the same boat. This means there were a lot of ineffectual people and systems in place. The people and systems need to be identified and removed.
The person who was in the white house, should be held responsible for the incredible lack of foresight and management coming from that sector. The sooner you can admit that, and place blame as it falls there, the more real your position will seem.
Otherwise it looks like you are saying that because some Dems did some bad things some Reps should get away with doing some bad things.
How about for once, we don't allow people and systems that do bad things, from getting away with it?
(AbE: I should add a note about the "political realities" you mentioned. It was the Republicans during the 1990's which drove and created the atmosphere where any additional spending measures were derided.
The Dems ended up appeasing Rep demands along this line and over their own longheld programs, including medicince, welfare, and social security. Any attempt on their part to initiate new programs was labelled "tax and spend". Remember that phrase Monk? Tax and Spend Democrats?
While I agreed with reps regarding balancing the budget, as well as cutting the pork out of the budget, the idea of no new programs or initiatives (beyond military) as well as cutting necessary ones, was backwards and prevented any real discussion of something as massive as a program to prevent coastal and river flooding.
So technically speaking, if you want to discuss partisan issues, it really was the majority of Reps which constitute the "they", even with respect to the political reality of not fixing NOs levee system.
It seems you are now trying to argue that Democrats are not Tax and Spend at all. Interesting and convenient reversal of characterization.)
This message has been edited by holmes, 09-06-2005 06:23 AM
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
™ Version 4.2
