Paradoxes of Partisan Politics

For Bush haters, I include two innocuous stories from the “Washington Post”. The first is about the Army Corps of Engineers, its projects and problems with New Orleans before this president took office. It starts with project that would drain more wetlands than all the developers do in most years. The other is about wind power. Texas will be the U.S. wind power leader.

Most of our problems AND successes are systematic ones, not partisan issues. Wind power if favored by Texans and fought by Kennedys. Does this fit the script? Wind and Solar are on the verge of becoming profitable businesses. Will the alternative lifestyle people still like them as much when Exxon is profiting from them? The big water projects and their big problems are the RESULT of big government interventions. Does it make sense to ask for more of the same and hope it will be better this time?

Bush haters attribute way too much to the vicissitudes of politics. They really believe that things turned bad in January 2001 and Bush was the cause. (Of course they overlook the robust economy and all the other good things I so often remind them about., but this comes easily to them.) Those of you who watched "Saturday Night Live" yesterday saw Al Gore in his hypothetical second term. The BS was so thick it was hard to breath. It was supposed to be funny, but I wondered if Dems didn't really believe it. Did they find it "funny" in the sense of ridiculous, or "funny" in the sense of telling a deeper truth? I fear the latter.

If you step back look at the whole system, you can still hate Bush if you are so inclined, but you will need to understand a little more complicated interactive reality.

Posted by Jack at May 14, 2006 2:23 PM
Comment #148111

You’ve made some good points.
As much as there is to criticise about the Bush administration, they didn’t cause all the problems America has. History didn’t begin in Jan. ‘01 and America wasn’t Shangri-La until the evil Bushies “seized” power.
You can’t tell it from reading the silly fantasies so common among the liberals.
They don’t like to be reminded of it, but after decades of almost unbroken Democrat dominance of politics and Congress the pinnacle of their years of opportunity to make America a paradise was…Jimmy Carter. I know there’s an effort to rehabilitate his image and rewrite history to make him a great president but I lived through it. I know better.
Now we have those great environmentalists who just love to lecture the rest of us about how we should live going NIMBY on wind power. When oil companies diversify into other forms of energy I have no doubt that lefties will condemn them as they do now.
I didn’t see the SNL thing (I don’t watch the idiot box)but I’ll bet it was funny in a tragic sort of way. It’s hard enough to imagine that boob in a first term. A second term is beyond comprehension.

Posted by: traveller at May 14, 2006 3:54 PM
Comment #148120

The war on terrorism was coming to America with, or without Bush. The war in Iraq was not. That was Bush’s creation, figment of his imagination.

The 5.65 trillion dollar national debt was inherited by Bush. He could have searched a little harder for his veto pen, but, instead chose to go fishing instead and allow the national debt to grow by 50% and by 100% by the time he leaves office.

The immigration problem has been growing since Reagan said come one, come all, legal and illegal, ye shall be rewarded with citizenship in time. But for Bush to absolutely ignore our borders after 9/11 is the height of hubris and neglect of office.

Yes, you are right. The economy is looking good on paper right now with national and historical averages. But, more than have this country has another feeling about it. See this months Consumer confidence numbers. The half losing job security, fighting staple and basic consumable inflation, and reeling under real wage stagnation, the economy doesn’t ‘feel’ good to them at all. And that is leaving aside the national debt and deficits which their children will have pay in increased taxes throughout the rest of their work lives.

The energy crisis was coming again. We felt it in the 1970’s and knew one day it would return. It has. So, why is it tax cutting Republicans haven’t eliminated the gasoline tax yet? Oh, yeah, that’s right, that would benefit primarily the working middle class and poor, and have little meaning to their very wealthy base.

Public tax dollars funding private schools, private charitable organizations, church sponsored activities, advertising campaign for marriage: these and more were not on the horizon until Bush came into office. He alone owns the responsibility for the deficits these misadventures have rang up. Ben Franklin I think, said: A penny saved is a penny earned. Bush counters that wisdom with ‘a pound wasted should be good for something in the history books about me! ‘

Nice try there, Jack. But, no, Bush is responsible for a great deal that did not exist before he arrived in the Oval Office. Sorry, you don’t get a cigar for this apologetic article.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 14, 2006 5:05 PM
Comment #148142

My contention is, and has always been, with Americans, we don’t give a rat’s hairy ass as long as it’s cheaper (hmmm, is this windpower actually cheaper?) and that it won’t give our kids disfiguring tumors. That’s pretty much the American criterion, for our utilitarian keisters. I think that recycling has proven itself a complete annoyance as was designed by rich people in L.L. Bean to screw up the trash take out for Joe and Mary Q. Lunchbox. Like it’s all our fault that seagulls somehow strangle themselves in plastic six pack carriers. Why not a ban on stupid seagulls who get their heads caught in things? I think recycling should be for those who have the spare time to really care about the earth. I want Al Gore to personally come over and sort out my garbage.

I think we also should be allowed to hunt alligators to extinction, why are we saving these creatures? Why do we have conservational seasons for hunting anything? What the hell is the difference between a vegan and a vegetarian? Okay I’m off topic.

I’m not shocked that the Kennedy’s don’t want the windmill pinwheels hogging up their view of the Atlantic from the coast of Martha’s Vinyard. The limozine liberals (not actually democrats) like it until it inconveniences them, like me sorting out catfood cans from plastic bottles every Wednesday. I think rich people should all have to have powerplants in all of their neighborhoods and on their golf course greens. I hope they all develop tumors for all of the shit that we eat while they get huge tax cuts and other perks. If we don’t even have a sufficient justice system that they can’t buy their own way out of ($$$), this may be the only means to get even with them. May they all get tumors and their kids be born with gills and webbed digits.

Posted by: Novenge at May 14, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #148147

Jack???!!! SNL is still on the air? Are you sure?You actually might have been the only viewer. You should write them and tell them as the only (or last) person watching Saturday Night Live that you didn’t appreciate that skit that didn’t reinforce your world view.

Posted by: Novenge at May 14, 2006 7:46 PM
Comment #148157

Weary Willie,

Do you honestly think we should be funding prvate institutions with OUR tax dollars? Why should I support it? I think the point is to make our public schools hopefully comparable to the private ones and that means proper funding, better materials and nationally qualified teachers who are paid enough to give a crap. No child left behind is a political answer that merely passes the buck as opposed to a reallistic answer that serves the people of this country and our nation at large. I’m the product of the Massachussetts public school system—see why we want more for our kids?

Also with subsidizing private charities we have been doing that for years (American Way, The Salvation Army, soup kitchens and the like). What is more irresponsible is a religious institution turning to the government for assistance. Do you reallize the overarching bureacracy in that proposition especially when you are avidly trying to do something humanitarian to the best of your ability? It is not all that Bush with his “Olaskyist” stance is claiming.

Also advertizing for marriage? Like men actually have any say in any of it. It’s not up to the male like most things in any relationship. Female whining and ultimatums are advertizement enough—trust me.

David is actually correct.

(Watchblog is having a slow week in all three aisles)

Posted by: Novenge at May 14, 2006 8:31 PM
Comment #148158

It is quite ironic, though, that a profoundly liberal senator like Edward Kennedy can get away with blocking the development of wind technology in his home state without so much as a peep from his constituents. He had good reason though: there are million dollar views that need protecting.
But I must agree with David—to an extent. Neglecting the border issue is the major flaw of this Administration. One might even label it criminal.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 14, 2006 8:37 PM
Comment #148167

Where’s the fun in that, Weary Willie!?

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 14, 2006 9:02 PM
Comment #148175

Weary Willie:

Can you guarantee EVERYONE can go to Private School?

Posted by: Aldous at May 14, 2006 9:14 PM
Comment #148181

The trouble with wind power is that when the first documentation of a bird runing into the blades occurs, all the facilities will be shut down until congress investigates with a minimum of four committees and declares through the environmentalist testimony that the bird was a mauve meadowlark from New Zealand and it was the only one known. Personally I am a big fan of solar and wind energy. By the way we should harness the hot air from the nations capital and use it for regional energy and this would also contribute to fighting global warming. Just think Jack, you may benefit somehow in your local energy package. Don’t go to the bank yet, though.

Posted by: tomh at May 14, 2006 9:28 PM
Comment #148185


“The trouble with wind power is that when the first documentation of a bird runing into the blades occurs, all the facilities will be shut down until congress investigates with a minimum of four committees and declares through the environmentalist testimony that the bird was a mauve meadowlark from New Zealand and it was the only one known.”

Sarcastic or not, have you not seen the wind farm off of I-10 outside of Palm Springs?

It has been there at least 15 years that I know of and I have only seen it down 1 time in my travels back and forth to L.A.
There is another outside Tehachapi Ca, between Mojave and Bakersfield.

Posted by: Rocky at May 14, 2006 9:54 PM
Comment #148187

I’ve often thought of buying a couple of wind turbines myself for the farm. Right now though I feel it’s not very cost effective. But if energy rates keep increasing like they have I just might take the plunge. A turbine the last I knew cost around $30,000. This was about 10 years ago. I don’t know if they cheaper by now or not.
I don’t know if they’d produce enough power for the factory or not. But the city wouldn’t let me put them up anyway. I would most like take around 5 or 6.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 14, 2006 9:56 PM
Comment #148189

I’ve been past that wind farm on I-10 a few times myself. I’ve never seen it down.
Does the farm power only Palm Springs or does it send power to other places as well? I know it’s big.
Also could the turbine be closer or is it nessary to spacethem like they are?

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 14, 2006 10:01 PM
Comment #148197

Let’s see. Can’t defend Bush because he’s so over the line inept, so therefore, it’s those mean and nasty Bush haters including SNL to blame for the situation Bush finds himself in.

Almost as logical as Population decline.

Posted by: gergle at May 14, 2006 11:03 PM
Comment #148199

I was sarcasm. The point in the sarcasm is that there is always somebody with some off the wall position that will try to negate worthwhile technology. I personally fully agree with wind turbines to generate electrical energy. Also solar needs a breakthrough in pricing to make it more affordable. I can buy a total solar package for my home for $30k with a warranty for 20 years. That is not acceptible for me. Others may find that ok. But if the cost could be reduced by 40%, it would make me think more seriously about it. I have never priced wind turbines, but I sense that it is more costly than solar.

Posted by: tomh at May 14, 2006 11:06 PM
Comment #148202

As to the corpsof engeneers they are subject to the same political nonsense that other government agencies are. It’s not the corps fault that politicians and their constituents continue to want to live in a river delta and then complain when it floods. That’s called being out of touch with reality.

As to the wind farm. I wonder how Bush would react to having his ranch surrounded by wind turbines. Somehow I don’t believe he’d be all that happy. I’m not saying Kennedy is right, but I wouldn’t like a highrise being built next door to me.

Posted by: gergle at May 14, 2006 11:12 PM
Comment #148204

yeah the wind power in Texas may not happen either. Everyone loves alternative powers till theyre comming to their area. NIMBY is a sad, sad problem in this country, especially considering we are talking about off shore windmills built by a company which designs the oil platforms (meaning very secure) EIGHT MILES off the shore. Whats ironic is that moron bird enthusiasts are concerned about the windmills because birds run into them and die. I’m sorry, would you rather we get power from coal, which means major environmental damage durring extraction, and even with clean coal technologies being implemented over time, major environmental effects.

Vegetarians don’t eat meat, vegans don’t eat any animal products, including eggs, milk, cheese, honey, etc. Raw vegans don’t eat anything cooked, and fruitarians only eat food which can be picked from already living plants, without killing anything.

Yes, the last two exist, I used to work at a healthfoods store and have met a few of them. Treating these lifestyles as illegitimate or somehow stupid is a little consdescending.

Posted by: iandanger at May 14, 2006 11:24 PM
Comment #148214


I blame Bush for the war in Iraq, how it was run, our debt, and how Katrina was handled. Also, I’m sick of the constant scandals and lying.

In the case of the “WindPower”, the developer, Cape Wind Associates, got “specific exemptions” last year from Congress that didn’t require it to bid on the project or to follow new regulatory guidelines. Kennedy didn’t like that, and why should he?

Doesn’t sound to me like he is against windpower. Sounds like he just wants companies to bid on government projects and for them to follow guidelines, like not building the “windpower” machines on State parks.

Question for you: Do you think companies should have to bid on government projects? This cuts out preferential treatment and backdoor political dealings and saves us money. What’s wrong with that? We can’t have windpower and do it right?

Posted by: Max at May 14, 2006 11:54 PM
Comment #148217


“Also could the turbine be closer or is it nessary to spacethem like they are?”

I reall can’t answer that. I don’t know enough about the technology.
I can only guess that there may be an interference with the air flow if they are closer together.
That’s only a guess though.
If I remember right the farm in Tehachapi had about the same spacing. I also saw another wind farm on the windward side of Oahu in Hawaii, also the same spacing.

Here is a link to Wikipedia with information about the global use of wind;

And another about the Palm Springs array;

The problems with wind and solar, if I remember corectectly is with reliability and maintenence, as well as the original cost.
I have seen many singular wind generators at the Palm Springs array down for repair or maybe just maintenence.
The environment there can be extremely harsh with blowing sand and extreme heat as well.

I had a friend back in the early ’70s. he owned a 65 ford Econoline van with the small (I think it was 176ci) straight 6 engine. He ran into a dust storm there in that pass that actually forced him to stop because he was only able to go 10-15 mph into the wind, so what was the point.

Posted by: Rocky at May 15, 2006 12:10 AM
Comment #148226

Rocky , Ron, I drive by those wind generators at least once a month, going to palm springs or lake havasu. at first they looked kind of different,they broke up the long desert drive,but after 15 years their ugly!and they can’t be very reliable, the last five years or so, at least half of them are not working.I sometimes get off a exit close by and the station owner said hundreds of hawks and other soaring birds have been choped to bits by the blades. i heard they gave very large tax breaks when they put them up, to bad they don’t maintain them.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 15, 2006 12:49 AM
Comment #148228

Rocky, your so right about the wind in that pass, with the sand mixed with it, ive seen paint stripped right off brand new cars.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 15, 2006 1:00 AM
Comment #148230

I am sure we could create enough energy by tapping in to all that gas emitted from politicians mouths. I say put ‘em to good use!

Posted by: djm at May 15, 2006 1:38 AM
Comment #148266

If I were in your shoes, I would do the article less on how Bush-hating misses the point, and more on the corp of engineers. That looks like the good issues, and you can satisfy your yearning for shutting down government waste and pork-barrel spending as a conservative by taking this on.

I think the Republicans are suffering now because they’ve put more effort into keeping their power and taking it away from Democrats than they have into properly running the country they’ve managed to get control of.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2006 8:50 AM
Comment #148269

The problem is, you’re failing to recognize that the real problem isn’t that Bush and the GOP majorities are unpopular, it’s what has happened for them to get that way. Or to put it another way, the trouble the hatred for Bush, as far as you’re concerned, is that it’s actually justified.

You folks have spent all too much time covering for their collective asses, accepting and making excuses for their actions, and letting the Democrats be the scapegoats for when things go wrong.

During all that time, though the policy problems of your GOP controlled legislature and White House have been piling up. Only lately have you folks been showing your concern and outrage with that your folks have been doing all along.

If you want to restore health to the Republican party, your choice, given an article about Bush hatred and and article about the Army Corp of Engineers being a porkbarrel mess, should be the latter. It’s the more important of the two if what you desire are practical changes in government for the better.

You have to get it to where your people in Washington are part of the solution to people’s problems, rather than the part of the problem themselves. You won’t get that by protecting them all the time.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2006 9:12 AM
Comment #148270
Wind power if favored by Texans and fought by Kennedys.


This is a gross oversimplication and you know it. The Texas wind power project is in the middle of nowhere. (At least as far as humans, not birds, are concerned.) The project the Kennedy’s opposed was near high-priced beachfront property. When a bunch of wealthy Republicans volunteer to have a wind farm ruin their beachfront view, I’ll be impressed…

Posted by: Woody Mena at May 15, 2006 9:16 AM
Comment #148294


You have a great way of flushing out the arguments of the left. I see it this way;
War in Iraq - turn to page 25 in the liberal play book
Energy - page 10
Deficits - page 15
Follow this, Clinton ignores UN to bomb in Kosovo and he is a hero, he stifles energy programs for environ-“mentals” and the Lippo Grp he cares for the animals. FDR tapped phones, opened mail and interred American citizens and is adored. For 50 years of power on the hill the Dems never saw a deficit they didn’t like. It never ends, make a charge and defend it with feelings, when faced with facts change the story. Repubs and Dems alike have the same problem when they get to DC, power! Many a good man has had his decisions challenged, leadership means hard choices and no President can appease all americans. Some leaders have their vision narrowed by the glare of the spotlight, while many charlatans have prospered because of the power the Hill gives them. Many/most of the problems we face as a nation we face because Senators, Congressmen and Presidents get caught up in the tug of war between public service, political wrangling, media hype and international events while it seems we the people get lost in the wash. No, Bush is not untouchable to his critics, but make the criticism based on facts and sources that can be researched/debunked or confirmed, not because you hate him. No, he is not the devil the Dems make him out to be, everyday information comes out of Iraq that confirms the fears of WMD, no he didn’t cause any problems due to Katerina the feds are/should be the last line of defense in a natural disaster. His taxcuts have brought more money (most in history?) into the treasury to pay down the deficit,(see latest CBO report} and if he had the power to change world demand for gas to ensure us $1.00 a gallon he wouldn’t be the President, he’d be King of the world.

Posted by: JR at May 15, 2006 11:22 AM
Comment #148298

It’s pretty sad that otherwise rational Republicans like Jack have to manufacture some kind of personal vendetta against the President on the part of everyone who disagrees with his policies.

Listen, I know for a fact that none of you guys like the way Republicans are mismanaging the budget and breaking government growth records. If you spent as much energy on pressuring your Republican representatives to cut spending as you do on hating Ted Kennedy, America wouldn’t be in the financial mess it’s in.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 15, 2006 11:28 AM
Comment #148305

How many offshore wind farm(s) in US?
These beasts usually could generate way more MW/h than the ground ones, with less public opposition than the ground ones.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 15, 2006 11:53 AM
Comment #148307

Flushing out, no. He’s just making rhetorically provocative statements that terribly oversimplify the reasons liberals so strongly despise this president. In his book, and apparently yours, we’re the bad guys because we don’t give him his fair chance to get things right. Trouble is, with the Republicans in majority, and the lead he once had in the polls and in American’s opinions, he had every chance to get things right.

I don’t suppose that Bush is screwing up and doing these things that are wrong because he’s evil or anything. I just think he and the rest of the current crop of Republicans have a very dysfunctional approach to government, and to their own conservatism.

You folks cover for that by pointing to our dysfunctions with Clinton, both real and imagined. Well, JR, even if those things are true, two wrongs do no make a right, and Bush is doing things wrong regardless of whether Clinton did them also.

I think on a number of these issues, you’re buying the spin, rather than looking at the plain facts. Yes, Clinton Bombed Kosovo, but this was a case of it being easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission. Afterwards, he smoothed things over, and internationalized things. Morever, Clinton’s attack was justified by evidence on the ground.

You say information has come out justifying the fears regarding WMDs. Bull. I’ve seen nothing to indicate that the stockpiles were still in existence, nothing to demonstrate the continued existence Chem Bio manufacturing, nothing at all to indicate an active nuclear refinement program. Prove all that, find all that, and then talk to us about well-founded fears.

The Federal government should be ready to act the moment a manmade or natural disaster hits us. Applying that kind of anti-big government ideology here is asking for trouble, because the very issue with large-scale disasters like Katrina is that the event is so destructive that infrastructure and government’s ability are taken along with everything else. The Federal government may be the only entity with the ability to manage and mitigate the situation. Additionally, with large scale disasters that cross state line, the Federal government has to be on the ball fast because the state government will otherwise be working without effective official coordination, if they’re working at all.

The tax cuts? Well, JR, you’re only assuming the Tax Cuts are responsible for the increase in prosperity. It’s circular reasoning on your part, since you never adequately explain what basis you all have for this belief. The economy works on any number of other forces, of which tax cuts are historically a weak contributor.

Regardless, it’s not free money. It’s money future taxpayers will have to pay for. You’re not lowering taxes, you’re forcing future generations to pay more. How conservative of you. Moreover, we’re funding China’s ascendancy here, since they’re buying so much of our debt here. This free-lunch mentality is why Republicans have gotten their behavior so screwed up. They’re acting, and not counting the cost. Counting the cost would be the timid thing to do. Never mind the wisdom (or lack of it) in spending money we don’t have.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2006 11:58 AM
Comment #148329

Better to ask forgiveness then ask for permission? Great foreign policy there. Bush and Blair and many members of the foreign community asked, asked again, warned Saddam and waited again. No evidence? What was Bill Clinton worried about then? What does Blair have to back Bush for? Is he in Big oil too? Evidence? One of Saddams Generals ( Sada ) has written a book describing the use of gutted 747’s to move the gas, chemicals and weapons making materials to Syria and the Bekah valley in 2002, (for safe keeping}, or is he in on it too? Materials and records recovered show a link with terrorists and Saddams military in the 1990’s. It’s out there, you folks just don’t want to see it. If the mayor of NO, If the Governor of LA had been strong in their announcements and used their state and local emergency agencies efficiently before the hurricane hit the disaster in NO would have been much, much different. Big government means bureaucrats, means delays, means problems. How can you deny the inflow into the treasury? Cut taxes and individuals from poor to rich have more money in hand to spend or save as they see fit, to do business. More business means more work, more work means more money moving through the economy, and rich or poor a strong economy is good for everyone. If we raise taxes it’s more money for government, can they spend your money better than you? Not me. I have not been an apologist for Bush, he is more of a fiscal liberal then I would care for, and I’m not sure he knows he can veto legislation but, for the times he has inherited, I can’t think of any presidential wannabes from the last election cycle that would be as effective in standing up to Jihadists. From the left is accuse, accuse and blame, no cogent thorough plans for change, just that they would do it better, smarter and with less spending. Really?

Posted by: JR at May 15, 2006 1:19 PM
Comment #148338


The president was told numerous times Iraq had no WMDs. Saddaam and Al Qaeda were enemies. It’s been proven so many times, I am not going to bother citing the evidence for you, you obviously won’t see it. Even if you agree with the reasons for war, certainly you can’t agree with how it was handled.

You can argue, after the fact, that the mayor of NO should have been better prepared, but what you need to acknowledge is that the federal government was expected to help. They did not. They did not do their job. You want to change the rules after the fact fine, but the job the Federal gov did was not what was expected.

Finally, we need to raise taxes so we can pay off our debts. Got it? We are owned by China at this point. There won’t be extra money for the government to spend for a long, long time. Just in case you’re not paying attention you’re family share of the debt is over a hundred thousand dollars. If our economy collapses as many economists say it can, then your kids will live in squalor.

Republicans are all borrow, spend, borrow, spend, spend on huge initiative with no planning, more spend, spend some more. You want a plan? Go after Osama. End the war. Pay off our debt. Does common sense really have to be spelled out to you guys?

Posted by: Max at May 15, 2006 1:52 PM
Comment #148342

I know that in an emergency or a time sensitive situation, waiting for full international cooperation may be problematic. The action in Kosovo was complicated by certain orthodox loyalties between Russia and Serbia, and Russia could have vetoed any action we went about doing. In that case, though, we didn’t go in with some self-styled coalition, we went in with nothing less than NATO. Despited difficulties in working out the differences between the strong member countries, we nonetheless managed in the space of two months to back a vicious tyrant down, and stop the genocidal campaign against the ethnic Albanians. What’s more, we left enough soldiers in place, American then international, to keep the peace in that region.

As for General Sada, you should consider that the General was out of active service since the time of the Gulf War and that he never saw this operation firsthand. He heard about this from a couple of friends.

Get me the two pilots who apparently told him about this. Track down these flights, and document what happened. Has it occured to you that even as you might criticize the MSM for not carrying this, the Bush administration has not pushed this either, despite all the bad press?

I mean, this administration wasn’t shy about declassifying information in order to support its case for war. We recently heard of the president’s unvetted disclosure of classified information on that count. So why no disclosure on the movements of WMDs, when it could save his ass?

As for Katrina, I guess I could borrow a phrase from the honored Saint Rumsfeld and say you deal with the disaster you’ve got, not the one you’d like to have. People’s lives are at stake. Point out to me where it matters who goes into action. What if we’re dealing with an Earthquake or a terrorist attack, instead, where the onset of the problem is near instantaneous? Even with Hurricanes, lead time can be short because of the scientific uncertainty in predicting a hurricane’s path.

As for bureaucracy, I think in your ideological fervor you forget that the states would have their own bureaucracy, and that increasing demands on those would not only increase the amount of bureaucracy to wade through, but also the number and varieties. The key is to balance the two in an optimal fashion. It’s these chain of command problems that plagued FEMA during the days after Katrina made landfall. Without clear federal leadership and good lines of communication, local efforts could not be effectively coordinated.

As for the tax cuts, I again ask you why you think the current gains in revenue have anything to do with the tax cuts. They could in fact be gains in spite of the effects of the deficit spending. No other president in American history has ever cut taxes during war, for precisely the reason that wars tend to produce long-term, unpredictable spending.

If we raise taxes, then that means we’re paying for what we’re getting, rather than forcing a future generation to pay both ours taxes and their own. How our government officials spend is a separate problem. The spending of this government has relentlessly expanded since the beginning of this administration, surpassing even the most liberal Democrat administration. Government has expanded. Tax cuts have not done a damn thing to prevent any of that excess spending and government expansion!

As for who could stand up to Jihadists, its not my problem that so many people like you simply don’t trust your fellow Americans. You seem to be willing to trust a man who has failed at nearly everything he’s been asked to do, rather than go to anybody else, even within your own party. We accuse, we blame, but we provide clear evidence for the actions in question, and clear reasons why we feel responsibility rests with the offending parties.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2006 2:26 PM
Comment #148350

The slaughter was stopped, and we left US troops, (still there), not just international troops. It was ok to save them? By taking out Saddam for fear of WMD we accidently stopped the slaughter of Iraqis, sorry! that doesn’t count ‘cause you disagree with the war or its premise? The general could be lying, find the pilots? Sada lied for BIG OIL too? Because no President cut taxes in a time of war, Bush shouldn’t? The states line of communications would be much easier to overcome, why call Washington for a problem you can PREPARE for yourself?, get the Feds involved by all means, but don’t rely first and foremost on their abilities - FEMA is a reactive agency, your state and local government should be proactive. Spending in this administration is sickening to me, but with his taxcuts in place for the next 4-5 years the deficit will shrink “if” spending is controlled. What else but the increased economic activity spurred by taxcuts for individuals, small businesses, investors and corporations is responsible for the income? When the cost of doing business is less, businesses will do more of it, increasing revenues and the amount of taxes paid to the treasury. Don’t trust americans? Who are you talking about? I don’t trust people who join hands and announce their approval of a war, reading and being privvy to the same intelligence as the President, then denouncing it later for political gain. Clinton said it was “the economy stupid” and he was applauded. Bush pushed measures to stir the economy after our nation was attcked and is denounced for taxcuts to the rich. Raise taxes and you get more government, the one you feel is not worthy of your trust, that’s what you pay for, PERIOD. You have an ideal you wish to believe is true, but no evidence exsists to prove the taxcuts were bad, only good news, that the administration was “responsible” for FEMA problems in LA/MS or that the intelligence used in the prosecution of the war was a “lie”. You yearn for Dems in the majority of the House and Senate again, maybe even the Presidency. Until you reconcile your demagogery of the “bad” economy to the same middle class that is profiting from it, until you understand that Americans want leadership, not complaints and personal attacks, until your party understands that americans want to believe in the American ability to achieve greatness, not be told over and over how racist, cruel, bullying, facist, terroristic or threatening to the world this administration and or America is, while begging for involvement in Darfur unilaterly, your party will remain a minority party.

Posted by: JR at May 15, 2006 3:20 PM
Comment #148360

Jack and fellow travelers. You people must be gluttons for punishment as well as occupants in a bubble. You need to get real.

I am no Bush hater. I am a Bush politics hater. My old pappy advised me never to use the word hate with anyone. Good advice. Bush may be the nicest guy in the world; a guy you’d like to share a beer with. However, all those good guy qualities do not make him a competent president. General Grant was probably also a nice person but a terrible president.

I cannot speak for most people who dislike the President, but I am willing to bet that many do not like what he stands for and what he has done. Please leave his personality out of it! Heck, I am even willing to say he is not stupid. In fact I give him and Mr. Rove credit for the ability to play to peoples’ fear in order to pursue a political agenda. Once and for all it is the politics that I abhor.

You mention the strong economy. Robust for whom? I happen to have a considerable amount of stock (all inherited) and would benefit if there were no capital gains tax. For me and many like me tax cuts are a bonanza. But are they, have they, been good for the country? I say no. With over 40 million citizens with no health insurance and millions, that’s right millions, of children going hungry in America it seems to me that this market miracle does not work well for everyone. Nor should it. However, must we forget about those who are left behind when the market performs its miraculous gyrations?

Many of the bloggers on this site have listed where and how on so many policy issues this administration has been a disaster that it would not behoove me to repeat those claims. So please quit with the “Bush haters” mantra. We can’t stand his politics and what they are doing to our country.

Peace, cml

Posted by: cml at May 15, 2006 4:10 PM
Comment #148392

We only have a few soldiers left in Kosovo. How long will it be before we can say the same of Iraq?

I don’t mind getting rid of Saddam, freeing the Iraqis, and stopping the murder of innocent Iraqis. I have no idea what in my writing would feed such an idea, short of somebody bringing their preconceived notions of me into their writing.

Regarding General Sada: If all we have to go on is a secondhand report, how do we determine the truth? You want to believe that he’s telling truth. Even if he thinks he does, though, he’s relating somebody else’s story. Those persons could A)figments of Sada’s imagination, B)lying to him, or C)misinterpreted by him.

This is why the media won’t report it, and why I won’t give it credit. He wasn’t involved, he can’t tell us what exactly happened, or whatever else.

Similar problems exist for your claim on Tax Cuts. How do you know it was the tax cuts? Other factors are involved. Technology can increase efficiency, enable new businesses. Investor confidence can get money out in the system. There are any number of alternative explanation which you haven’t discounted successfuly as causes.

This administration should also put paid to the notion that you can control spending by not taxing more. They have managed both record deficits and record tax cuts at the same time. I don’t think that’s a coincidence.

With thinking like this, it’s no wonder that Democrats have a double digit lead in this country on who the people want to lead.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2006 6:26 PM
Comment #148406

I doubt I’d like a beer with a phoney like Bush. Not my cup of tea, to mix a few metaphors. I’d rather drink a cerveza with a migrant.

Posted by: gergle at May 15, 2006 7:05 PM
Comment #148429

Thanks for the links.
I googled wind power and got some interesting information about small turbines. All the ones I saw need category 2 or better winds to operate. According to the wind map the only places in Georgia that have winds in those categories are along the coast or in the mountains. Sense I don’t live in either place it’s not going to work here.
But I do have enough water flow for hydro power if I decide to go that way.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 15, 2006 8:04 PM
Comment #148505



Posted by: Rocky at May 15, 2006 10:31 PM
Comment #148579

Anyone know anything about calea. Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA)

seems this is what all the hellabalooh is about with the NSA.

was bush in control in 94? that boy does get around for someone who knows squat about what the people want. illegals should be treated like the criminals they are. pay to stay or go away!

Posted by: lm at May 16, 2006 9:52 AM
Comment #148601

So, you wouldn’t want to have a beer with Jimmy Carter, or Billy Clinton either then.
I would’ve used Lame Brian Johnson first but he’s no longer with us. But he was the biggest phony going. Now it’s anybodies guess between the last two.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 16, 2006 11:22 AM
Comment #148754

Hey Ron, what did two of the smartest Presidents, Mr clinton and Mr carter, have in common? clue BEER and Dumb. come on, it’s a joke. :@)

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 16, 2006 8:19 PM
Comment #148861


Bill Clinton, I would agree. Carter a phoney? I would disagree. He was a politician, so yeah he can be phoney sometimes. He’s rich and probably doesn’t really relate to the poor in a very real way, but at least he doesn’t pander by pretendng to be one of them or use populist issues to divide them. I’m not sure he drinks beer, though.

Posted by: gergle at May 17, 2006 6:37 AM
Comment #148957

Ron, go down the road a little farther ,if they drank Beer. would mr clinton, and mr carter drink a Beer together? also if mr Reagan were alive, would he have a Beer with the two mr bushes.?

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 17, 2006 1:28 PM
Comment #149065

Rodney sure, but he would have forgotten where the frigde was.

Posted by: gergle at May 17, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #149125

Hell yaall I’d most likely drink a beer with Bill. I don’t have to like someones politics to associate with them. Actually he might be a fun guy to hang out with. He sure knows some interesting things to do with cigars.
Now Jimmy’s another story. Remember he and me are from the same home state. I knew about him before yaall did. The guy is a complete jerk.
I don’t know if Ronnie would drink a beer with either George. Even if he could find the fridge. I wouldn’t. They’re a little to high class for me.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 18, 2006 12:23 AM
Post a comment