Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Bill Polhemus

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
And your seemingly critizing every Democrat that you can find for all the
problems/mistakes and not one Republican is not making "political hay"?
In this I agree with you...making political hay over the whole thing right
now is "vomitous" (and maybe immoral, but that depends on what one's
morals are), but I would say that you are just as guilty as those you
sling mud at.  And while I have no doubt that Bush is a good, moral guy, I
also have no doubt that a large part of his administrations effort at this
point is to rehabilitat his image (which has been tarnished by this event,
rightly or wrongly).  This does not change the fact that I am sure that
he also wants to deal with the suffering and hardship...but the guy is a
politician and as such is also motivated by "spinning" the situation to
help his image.  I will point out that they (his adminstration) are
smart enough politically not to say things like you have of local and
state officials as they know that it would be viewed as "political hay"
(even if such things have some merit) and further tarnish his image...even
though they are likely thinking it.  In this area, I have no doubt that
there are some Democrats taking advantage of such a situation (i.e. being
able to critisize Bush with out Bush/Republicans able to respond without
looking callous for attacking some leader of a devistated area), but it
does not mean that all are.  Nor does it mean that some of the criticism
from Democrats of Bush and his adminstration's actions/response does not
have merit (as you seem to seem to believe that 100% of the
Bush bashing is that I can only say enjoy your fantasy
land and be sure to bring us some gifts when you decide to join reality).
So, the point is (at least MY point) is that there is plenty of
justifiable blame to go around (as well as some not so justifiable blame
that many seem willing to toss around).

My point is that you seem to be willing to tar and feather any Democrat
available, yet seem to believe Republicans (such as Bush) are pure little
altar boys in this.  Sorry to burst your bubble, but as good and moral as
Bush (and other Republicans) may be, he still contributed to dropping the

And if for no other reason, Republicans are now enjoying one of the
little downsides of being in power/ get the blame when things
go wrong, whether you really deserve it or not.  They are starting to
realize how easy and nice it is to be in a position to take pot shots from
the cheap seats now that they have the expensive seats.

As to Ted Kennedy, I will with hold comment as I really don't know him
just as I don't know Bush, so I cannot really comment on what good
(or bad) things either may have done that did not spend other people's
money.  I can say this:  both are damn good at spending other people's
money on a variety of things...some of which I would consider good, others
that I would consider bad.  Point is that by definition government types
(including politicians) ALWAYS spend other people's money because as you
so regularly point out the government has no money of its own (while I am
not sure I agree with that concept, it does not change the fact that even
if you consider the government at any level to have its own money [i.e.
money derived from taxes] as Kennedy or Bush spend such money they
are spending government money which by definition is other people's money
[in this case the "other people" is the government]).  So, your request
for me to name one good thing that Kennedy (or Bush or any other
politician) has done that did not spend other people's money would require
me to know what Kennedy (or Bush or any other politician) chooses to do
with his own money (i.e. who they donate to, etc)...and that I don't know.
I have no doubt that both Kennedy and Bush have donated to worthy
organizations in the past and will likely do so in the future (this is
likely able to be verified by looking at their required financial least to verify that they donate, but not necessarily who
they donate to so we will just have to believe that it is to worthy
organizations, which I am sure you will do for Bush, but maybe not for
Kennedy...but that is your bias).

Adrian, MI

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Bill Polhemus wrote:

> Scott Maxwell wrote:
> >Bill,
> >
> >Tell me where in ANY of my posts I have stated that I believed that the
> >state/local response was perfect and they have made no mistakes.  I have
> >repeatedly stated that I think that there is plenty of blame to go around,
> >
> >
> That's not the point.
> The point is that it's irrelevant, and no different now than it ever has
> been. Anyone who remembers Andrew ought to understand that no battle
> plan survives first contact.
> However, the Left has shamelessly jumped on everything of this kind,
> from the deaths of our fighting men in Iraq to this catastrophe, and
> made it a referendum on Bush.
> As I said before: I'm not much of a Bush fan--he's not a conservative
> and is no more observant of constitutional principles than Bill Clinton
> was, actually.
> But he is a good, moral man--vastly different from the last guy we had
> in the White House. And yet the Left continues to throw stones from
> inside their glass houses (if you can show me one "good" thing Ted
> Kennedy, to name just one, has done that hasn't come from spending
> someone else's money, I'd like to hear it, for example).
> There is plenty of time for the post-mortem later--and I'm confident it
> will show that the most egregious let-downs were at the city, county and
> state level, where the brunt of the responsibility must ALWAYS be. The
> facts that have come out already--especially those regarding the
> cowardly and even sinister behavior of the NOPD, the blocking of
> distribution of the Red Cross's pre-placed supplies by the LA Homeland
> Security and National Guard aparatchiks, and the refusal of Gov. Blanco
> to allow FEMA to do its job, are just of the few of the amazing things
> we've learned about. They'd be bad enough on the merits, but when you
> add to that these same officials' blaming the Federal level for the
> problems, it just stinks like a DNC put-up job.
> To try to make political hay out of this now, when people are still
> trying to get a grasp of the scope of this disaster, is the most
> immoral, vomitous thing I've ever witnessed--and I thought I'd already
> figured how low the Left could go.
> I remain nauseated every waking hour, whenever I read articles like this
> one:
> Here is Houston, and Texas, doing its d*mnedest to pitch in and help,
> and there's the Left's "newspaper of record" making the most outrageous
> allegations while the slime still roils in the streets of New Orleans
> (not that the NYT would recognize "slime" when it saw it--comes from
> living in the stuff every day).
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at:
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at:
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********