Reply With Quote
End of the Bush Era, I hope. [/Dionne]
oh , it's over already?? Can't be, shrub's horror show has 3 more years to run on TV screens near you, 24x7.
==========================
washingtonpost.com
End of the Bush Era
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005; A27
The Bush Era is over. The sooner politicians in both parties realize that, the better for them -- and the country.
Recent months, and especially the past two weeks, have brought home to a steadily growing majority of Americans the truth that President Bush's government doesn't work. His policies are failing, his approach to leadership is detached and self-indulgent, his way of politics has produced a divided, angry and dysfunctional public square. We dare not go on like this.
The Bush Era did not begin when he took office, or even with the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. It began on Sept. 14, 2001, when Bush declared at the World Trade Center site: "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon." Bush was, indeed, skilled in identifying enemies and rallying a nation already disposed to action. He failed to realize after Sept. 11 that it was not we who were lucky to have him as a leader, but he who was lucky to be president of a great country that understood the importance of standing together in the face of a grave foreign threat. Very nearly all of us rallied behind him.
If Bush had understood that his central task was to forge national unity, as he seemed to shortly after Sept. 11, the country would never have become so polarized. Instead, Bush put patriotism to the service of narrowly ideological policies and an extreme partisanship. He pushed for more tax cuts for his wealthiest supporters and shamelessly used relatively modest details in the bill creating a Department of Homeland Security as partisan cudgels in the 2002 elections.
He invoked our national anger over terrorism to win support for a war in Iraq. But he failed to pay heed to those who warned that the United States would need many more troops and careful planning to see the job through. The president assumed things would turn out fine, on the basis of wildly optimistic assumptions. Careful policymaking and thinking through potential flaws in your approach are not his administration's strong suits.
And so the Bush Era ended definitively on Sept. 2, the day Bush first toured the Gulf Coast States after Hurricane Katrina. There was no magic moment with a bullhorn. The utter failure of federal relief efforts had by then penetrated the country's consciousness. Yesterday's resignation of FEMA Director Michael Brown put an exclamation point on the failure.
The source of Bush's political success was his claim that he could protect Americans. Leadership, strength and security were Bush's calling cards. Over the past two weeks, they were lost in the surging waters of New Orleans.
But the first intimations of the end of the Bush Era came months ago. The president's post-election fixation on privatizing part of Social Security showed how out of touch he was. The more Bush discussed this boutique idea cooked up in conservative think tanks and Wall Street imaginations, the less the public liked it. The situation in Iraq deteriorated. The glorious economy Bush kept touting turned out not to be glorious for many Americans. The Census Bureau's annual economic report, released in the midst of the Gulf disaster, found that an additional 4.1 million Americans had slipped into poverty between 2001 and 2004.
The breaking of the Bush spell opens the way for leaders of both parties to declare their independence from the recent past. It gives forces outside the White House the opportunity to shape a more appropriate national agenda -- for competence and innovation in rebuilding the Katrina region and for new approaches to the problems created over the past 4 1/2 years.
The federal budget, already a mess before Katrina, is now a laughable do ent. Those who call for yet more tax cuts risk sounding like robots droning automated talking points programmed inside them long ago. Katrina has forced the issue of deep poverty back onto the national agenda after a long absence. Finding a way forward in -- and eventually out of -- Iraq will require creativity from those not implicated in the administration's mistakes. And if ever the phrase "reinventing government" had relevance, it is now that we have observed the performance of a government that allows political hacks to push aside the professionals.
And what of Bush, who has more than three years left in his term? Paradoxically, his best hope lies in recognizing that the Bush Era, as he and we have known it, really is gone. He can decide to help us in the transition to what comes next. Or he can cling stubbornly to his past and thereby doom himself to frustrating irrelevance.
[email protected]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...v=most_emailed
End of the Bush Era, I hope. [/Dionne]
Poll:
Which pipe did the author use before writing this article?
Bush is too cheap to be president... right marcus?? he just wants to save a few pennies
Maybe if DNC had a leader that tried to get a few republican votes for 08... But Howard Dean already gave the key's the 08 white house up with his stupid big fat mouth.
I guess we should put this guy in charge of the country...
More hysterics....still no accoutability from the left...
Even a poll challenged Bush remains a more attractive option than the hysterical pig like squealing and intellectual bankruptcy of the left...
Keep squealing pigs...keep squealing....because there is no sound more attractive than a hysterical squealing pig.
whott, the content of your messages is dwindling to level of vashner.
"still no accoutability from the left..."
WTF? The right has been running the country for 5 years. They deny all accountability, so how can the left be held accountable?
Who is denying all accountablity?
I believe he was referring to the state & municipal governments in Louisianna, which happen to be led by the left. Who are still pointing fingers at everyone else and not taking any responsibility themselves, when there clearly is reason. If you don't think they dropped several balls themselves, then I think "Independent" is the last thing you should be referring to yourself as.
"Who is denying all accountablity?"
Until shrub was forced/prompted to sorta accept responsibility for DHS/FEMA ups in Katrina, shrub, the Repugs, and every right-winger, red-stater here was saying that the Feds were absolutely faultless, even better than ever, and the NO/LA were totally to blame for their own predicament.
whott didn't say anything about "state & municipal", he said "left".
I am not and have not defended the NO/LA levels, since it's pretty clear they screwed up badly, and keep pointing their dirty fingers in every which direction. They are just politicians, genetic CYA liars.
What's also clear is that shrub/DHS/FEMA screwed up badly (confirmed by shrub's weasally recognition of same) but they have, until yesterday, refused all accountability, all responsibility, and, politicians that they are, pointed their dirty fingers in every which direction.
Do you jump on a bad situation and take all of the blame when you don't yet have all of the facts or know what or where it all went wrong? Especially when there's obviously so many different parties involved? Sorry, but I wouldn't. He's shown a of a lot more than anyone else has so far in taking responsibility and trying to fix the problem.
And is it seriously too much to ask for you to drop the "shrub/repug" bit? It's really damn stupid.
"when you don't yet have all of the facts"
"bush/Republicans" seemed have enough "facts" about NO/LA to start sliming and finger-pointing at NO/LA early in this catastrophe, while admitting no mistakes of their own, UNTIL dubya, unde duress, fessed up, sorta, only yesterday, over 2 weeks after the hurricane hit.
Why didn't, at the same time, "bush/Republicans" have equivalent "facts" about about their own ing DHS/FEMA?
DHS was supposed to be the "Republicans" this-is-how-govt is supposed to be done. The efficient model upon which the Repubs were to re-model the rest of the govt.
"lot more than anyone else has so far in taking responsibility"
Well, yeah, when compared to the obviously ty NO/LA "anyone elses" (there are only three "anyones": city/state/fed), anything else smells pretty good, but it's only in comparing dubya/DHS/FEMA to taht that they comes out "better".
Instead of comparing DHS/FEMA to a poor, tiny state's performance, why not compare dubya/DHS/FEMA to their own press releases, and their own spin game?
the "war president"?
the CEO/MBA/all-business presidency?
dubya's "vows" to keep America safe, etc, etc?
The Repubs went after Clinton for a blow-job, which was nothing but sex between consulting adults, perfectly legal, non-fatal, victimless. Ken Starr hounded and ripped Clinton mercilessly, and then Congress impeached him, for a damn blow-job.
Do you really think any anti-Repubs are gonna forget the Lewinsky affair and sewer the Repubs dragged America through, and let the Repubs get away now for real offenses? when the Repubs have totally ed up the country, 1000s of deaths, 100's of $B wasted? Payback's a , and it's just getting started.
If you can't stand the heat, ...
SW, boutons makes much more sense on ignore. Check it out.
LOL
boutons go buckwild on em!
Please reference a reliable source....I never saw ANYONE in the Bush Administration pointing fingers at ANYONE. Maybe you have them confused with NBADan.
I'm quite certain everything will come out about who/what/why/when/how it failed and why in the not too distant future. Well, it will if there is any hope of them fixing the process so it never happens again. One can only hope.
But better, nonetheless.Well, yeah, when compared to the obviously ty NO/LA "anyone elses" (there are only three "anyones": city/state/fed), anything else smells pretty good, but it's only in comparing dubya/DHS/FEMA to taht that they comes out "better".
It's not the size of the state's performance, it's its relevance to the correct process. Not utilizing all of your resources to remove your own citizens from immediate danger is far more relevant to the people's suffering after the hit, than trying to get to so many people spread out over a very large area with virtually all infrastructure destroyed. If they weren't there, they wouldn't need to be rescued, right? And who is spinning anything? Timing is critical...during the initial crisis they were trying to get to as many people as they could, and that's exactly what they should have been doing. They'll be plenty of time for all of this other later.Instead of comparing DHS/FEMA to a poor, tiny state's performance, why not compare dubya/DHS/FEMA to their own press releases, and their own spin game?
What does Clinton's blow job have to do with Hurricane Katrina? Is it possible for you to discuss one issue without going into things completely irrelevant to the subject?The Repubs went after Clinton for a blow-job, which was nothing but sex between consulting adults, perfectly legal, non-fatal, victimless. Ken Starr hounded and ripped Clinton mercilessly, and then Congress impeached him, for a damn blow-job.
Do you really think any anti-Repubs are gonna forget the Lewinsky affair and sewer the Repubs dragged America through, and let the Repubs get away now for real offenses? when the Repubs have totally ed up the country, 1000s of deaths, 100's of $B wasted? Payback's a , and it's just getting started.
If you can't stand the heat, ...
And he didn't get impeached for a blow-job, he got it for lying under oath...you know there's a difference, right? Of course, the lack of self-control and inappropriate behavior from our elected officials isn't exactly admirable, but that's just my opinion. I personally didn't give a about any of that, I thought it was stupid and a waste of thime....and I'm a Republican for the most part. Go figure.
What does heat have to do with anything? The only 2 places I've ever lived was Texas and Kenya....I can handle heat and humidity.
And thank you for the Bush/Repub thing....
Last edited by SpursWoman; 09-14-2005 at 11:28 AM.
"I never saw ANYONE in the Bush Administration pointing fingers at ANYONE"
what? unbelievable. city/state/fed were pointing fingers at each other, go read the papers.
dubya yesterday, in his "sort of/to the extent" acceptance of responsiblity, was still doing it, referring to failures at "all levels" which includes his own fed level, plus city and state, which AREN'T his responsibility to accept for.
He should have just simply said, "I accept repsonsiblity for federal failures", and let the state and city people accept their responsiblity for their failures.
"What does Clinton's blow job have to do with Hurricane Katrina?"
There is, and not just me, a lot of animosity and anger resulting from the the Repubs did to Clinton, for a Clinton act that was totally trivial and practiced by 1000's of govt employees, member of congress, interns, secretaries, judges, police, etc, every hour of every day all over DC. Sex, power, and money make DC go around, and everywhere else, too.
Now, the tables are turned, the Repubs are on the defensive for real, fatal, expensive ups in Iraq and Katrina, so payback, as viciously as they originally paid it out, is the order of the day.
"he didn't get impeached for a blow-job, he got it for lying under oath"
bull ing . With the evidence Linda Tripp provided, it was obvious as , to EVERYONE, that Clinton and Monica got caught. Clinton humiliated. A fun, but stupid, mistake. A lot of people disappointed, angry, but, end of story.
End of story? ing A no, not for the Repubs. Clinton wouldn't admit his pecadillo. And why should he?? What goes on sexually between 2 consulting adults is nobody's business but their own.
The Repubs invested a Special Prosecutor to prove, with a merciless viciousness and in salacious, infinitesimal detail, what EVERYBODY already knew was the case. Why were the Repubs even asking the question when EVERYONE knew the answer? It was pure, unmitigated viciousness. They wanted to humiliate to the maximum an already-humiliated Clinton. And then Starr dragged the country for weeks through stains, blue dresses, cigars as sex toys, etc. Absolutely Repug-nant and totally unnecessary. And then they took it all the way to impeachment, a historic act, but the Senate stopped it.
Did Clinton up lying? Yes. But the the bigger error was the Repugs politically persecuting him in th first place.
So don't ask (me) to cut the Repubs any slack over Iraq and Katrina, which are extremely serious, fatal professional incompetences, not blow-jobs.
At some point perhaps, the Repubs and the right will realize their hard-ball viciousness can be played by both sides, and that the vast majority of Americans are fed up with the total absence of decorum and civility and mutual respect in political life. I'm not holding my breath.
What goes round, comes round. And it's coming around for the Repubs now.
SW, here's an AP article that tries to show how "all sides got it wrong/pointed fingers"
The New York Times
September 14, 2005
Truth Is Casualty of Katrina's Aftermath
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 4:38 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- One of the bigger casualties of Hurricane Katrina's aftermath has been the truth itself. From federal emergency managers to Democrats, much fingerpointing -- and even the promises not to engage in it -- have fallen short of the facts.
For instance, the levees that broke weren't ones waiting for Army Corps of Engineer repairs as Democrats have implied. They were ones that had already been fortified, and still failed.
And, yes, some in government did envision long ago that the New Orleans levees might give way in a major hurricane -- despite President Bush's comments to the contrary.
Such casualties of fact are the result of traditional politics mixing with the emotion of disaster, say those who study truth in government.
''I find this more troubling than deception in the political campaigns,'' said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center who has studied truth in politics for years. ''The level of misunderstanding and the consequences of misunderstanding can be much more dramatic.
''If we don't hold the right people accountable and the right processes accountable, we'll risk having another catastrophe without real preparedness, and more people will die needlessly,'' she said.
Like flooded or flattened homes on the Gulf Coast, misstatements abound in this disaster. Here are some examples:
^LEVEE REPAIRS
Many Democrats have suggested that if the Army Corps had simply finished the incomplete levee reconstruction projects in that city, New Orleans might never have suffered the devastating flooding.
But the Army Corps' projects mentioned by those critics only were supposed to fortify levees in New Orleans to withstand a Category 3 hurricane. Katrina churned up the waters as a much more powerful Category 5 storm while in the Gulf and hit land while still at Category 4 furor.
Furthermore, the levees that were breached and flooded New Orleans-- 17th Street Canal Levee and London Avenue Canal Levee -- had already been fortified by the Army Corps to category 3 strength, with no additional work planned or even requested, the Army Corps said.
Even if the remaining levees had been upgraded as planned, the flooding would have occurred, officials say. More funding would have helped only to speed the post-flood draining of the city, they say.
''The levee failures we saw were in areas of the projects that were at their full project design. So that part of the project was in place and had this project been fully complete ... it's my opinion, based on the intensity of this storm, that the flooding of the Central Business District and the French Quarter would still have occurred,'' said Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Strock's answer, however, cuts against his own boss' credibility on another issue.
^LEVEE FAILURES
President Bush said shortly after the disaster that ''I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.''
In fact, many in New Orleans and the federal government anticipated exactly that scenario. And Strock's own comments make clear the Army Corps knew a hurricane over category 3 strength could pierce the levees.
The concerns were so serious that FEMA and the Homeland Security Department ran an exercise last year called ''Hurricane Pam'' that provided a dire prediction about a category 3 hurricane hitting New Orleans.
Flood waters would surge over levees, creating ''a catastrophic mass casualty/mass evacuation'' -- 61,290 dead and 384,257 injured or sick in a catastrophic flood that would leave swaths of southeast Louisiana uninhabitable for more than a year, the Hurricane Pam exercise predicted.
Bush finally clarified his remarks Monday, saying his comment was meant to suggest that there had been a false sense of relief that the levees had held when the storm passed, only to break a few hours later.
But that too, doesn't pass muster. The Bush administration's own emergency preparedness site warns resident that big floods often don't occur right away but ''generally develop over a period of days.''
^FINGERPOINTING
Put on the defensive, Republicans have offered another argument that hasn't held up.
''There will be plenty of time to play the blame game,'' Bush says in a refrain adopted by all of his top deputies to avoid assessing blame early in the crisis.
But almost as soon as they made the ''no-fingerpointing'' promise, Republicans pointed fingers back at local officials.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff did it on the Sunday talk shows a week ago.
''We will have time to go back and do an after-action report, but the time right now is to look at what the enormous tasks ahead are,'' Chertoff said, deflecting a question about whether government heads should roll.
Then a few minutes later, Chertoff suggested it was the fault of city officials that more people didn't evacuate. ''The way that emergency operations act under the law is the responsibility and the power, the authority, to order an evacuation rests with state and local officials,'' he said, adding the city should have used public buses to move the poor from harm's way.
^IRAQ EFFECT?
Democrats have alleged that funding for the Army Corps for New Orleans levee repairs and available personnel from National Guard were depleted by the war in Iraq, worsening the situation.
Such claims are oversimplified.
Critics can point to numerous spending proposals or ideas submitted to the Army Corps about the levees and New Orleans that didn't materialize.
But the Army Corps' spending for New Orleans' levee project actually has gone up under President Bush -- $276.4 million total in his first five budgets, compared with $195 million in the last five years of the Clinton administration, according to the White House Office of Management and Budget.
The Army Corps' overall budget did take two hits during 2003, when the Iraq war started.
But the first was a reduction to finance a legal settlement unrelated to Iraq. And the second came as part of a 0.65 percent cut in nondefense discretionary spending for all agencies initiated by Congress. That means the Army Corps wasn't singled out.
As for the National Guard, it is true a third of Louisiana's troops were in Iraq or Afghanistan when Katrina hit. But numerous states -- Michigan, New Mexico and Arizona to name a few -- were ready when the storm hit to send in their troops, only to be left waiting for days.
And once the widespread activations occurred, both active duty and National Guardsmen flowed into the disaster zone, rising from 5,100 the day of the storm to more than 65,000 in the region this week.
The bigger question for Congress will likely be why more troops weren't pre-positioned or activated as the storm approached.
------
On the Net:
Federal Emergency Management Agency: http://www.fema.gov
------
President Bush on the levees:
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...hcheck/bushlev ees.pdf
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on ''Meet the Press'':
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...hcheck/chert.p df
Army Corps of Engineers funding:
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...hcheck/corpsfu nding.pd f
Rep. William Jefferson, D-La. on ''Hannity and Colmes'':
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...hcheck/corps.p df
National Guard response to Katrina:
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...hcheck/forcefl owchart. pdf
Army Corps of Engineers Commander Lt. Gen. Carl Strock:
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/intera...thcheck/strock. pdf
* Copyright 2005 The Associated Press
Word...Props boutons and thanks...you are officially off my ignore list for now too. And I am not attempting to say you don't have a right to use those expressions or shouldn't use them...I personally am fond of referring to Demos as pro terrorists when the name fits...but just not every single post....it's just tedious.
And thank you for the Bush/Repub thing....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
