-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
!! OMG They've started to merge!
- Thread starter trilobyte
- Start date
- Status
Excess Poo Flakes
Banned
I must say, it is cool to see both of them working together, combing their statuses to get stuff done.
Prince of Space
Banned
SlickWilly223
Time ta STEP IT UP
Ah good movie.
typhonsentra
Banned
You know, this entire time I've been wondering when they'd start touring together again. Am I the only one?
SpeedingUptoStop
will totally Facebook friend you! *giggle* *LOL*
:lol
I've got a Blue Pants said:
Can't say I agree. It's extremely disheartening to see Clinton cover for this administration when it's apparent that Bush failed so miserably on his responsibilities as acting president in mobilizing resources to deal with the consequences of Katrina and, moreover, for his part in contributing to the necessary prevention measures including slashing funding and reversing his father's policy of preserving the wetlands, which helps absorb the impact of flooding. For the administration apologists, I'd like to point out local officials share blame here, however, the federal government plays an undeniably strong role in providing funding and federal initiatives that played a direct role in worsening the consequences. It's apparent that, once again, the Democrats lack a spine and are continuing to fail to mount any sort of opposition to this administrations' failings. Clinton is merely providing Bush a timely photo-op and damaging the Democrats' image further.
I support their efforts to fundraise and help, but these actions are relatively hollow in comparison to what should be done.
If Clinton wants to fundraise, great. If he wants to do it with H.W. Bush, great. I'm not knocking him for that. I am knocking him for vouching for the president's miserable reaction to the consequences of the hurricane and levees breaking, as if there was nothing in his power that he could do to stem the losses we endured and are enduring. The Democrats have been complacent and passive against this administration and has not been vocal enough, if at all, about its mistakes. Let me be clear: This isn't good for the Democrats certainly but, more importantly, this isn't good for the country. At the moment, we effectively have no opposition party; not simply for the sake of opposition, but for the sake of being critical in order to improve our response for future disasters. I realize sustained frustration and anger isn't looked favorably upon, but I can't imagine sustained complacency being a better alternative.
There were very real failures that no one can deny with regards to this disaster and Bush holds his share of responsibility. When the critics fail to vocalize those failures and connect the dots in a timely manner, the opportunity is lost and little, if anything, ends up changing. The public will not make those connections. It is not beyond the ability of Clinton, or anyone, to be able to assist those in need and to continue to do so while holding people accountable.
Your comments are lost on me for the record. I was in Houston this weekend, and I did help out in addition to simply donating. You'll have to kindly excuse me if I'm capable of doing more than one thing at a time.
There were very real failures that no one can deny with regards to this disaster and Bush holds his share of responsibility. When the critics fail to vocalize those failures and connect the dots in a timely manner, the opportunity is lost and little, if anything, ends up changing. The public will not make those connections. It is not beyond the ability of Clinton, or anyone, to be able to assist those in need and to continue to do so while holding people accountable.
Your comments are lost on me for the record. I was in Houston this weekend, and I did help out in addition to simply donating. You'll have to kindly excuse me if I'm capable of doing more than one thing at a time.
BigGreenMat
Member
Macam said:
Obviously you have been personally affected by this storm, but to say that Bush has failed miserably I think is untrue. What exactly did he do so miserably? Sounds like you are saying they aren't throwing enough money at it. If that is your only complaint then I would say it is a rather short list.
edit: And I hate Bush by the way.
dskillzhtown
keep your strippers out of my American football
Macam said:
WTF? They are working to raise money for relief and you want to bring "damaging the Democrats' image" into this? If you have been paying attention, both George Sr. and Clinton have been critical of the federal response and called for an investigation, but at this point, the thing that is important is helping the people who need help. Not playing fucking politics.
dskillzhtown said:
Oh, the "playing politics" card. Let me clarify a bit. I'm specifically referring to this comment, among others, by Clinton:
Perhaps not, but state and local officials were, as was the media, and countless citizens. I think they're more than entitled to make judgements and I think it's irresponsible of Clinton to implicitly absolve the administration in such a manner. He continued to make similar statements suggesting that while the situation was wrong, there were no major missteps on the administration's part when there very clearly was. And no, Bush Sr. didn't do any better job of criticizing his son:
Now ToxicAdam and co. make take to that line; that I'm being critical for the hell of being critical. But this isn't some passing political offense, like me not liking Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court because he's not liberal or moderate enough for my tastes or some other relatively minor issue in comparison. We're talking about life and death issues, specifically one that has displaced over a quarter of a million people, killed potentially hundreds or thousands, and shut down the world's 5th largest port, and a major lifeline not only to the Gulf Coast region, but to the entire country that relies tremendously upon it. A large part of that stems specifically from a lack of timely reaction from this administration and failures running all the way down to the state and local level. It's not a matter of having a crystal ball, it's a matter of when the shit hits the fan, of being able to react quickly. That hasn't happened to date.
The administration is trying to dodge around it by pushing the blame downwards and dancing around the issue with selective phrasing; that's to be expected. Clinton however, is not in that position and I think it's important that one of the most high profile representatives of the opposition take to the platform here. You can call that politics if you like, but I call that being responsible and reasonable. I don't care if any Democrats gain seats from it; I don't care if more Republicans gain from it. What I do care about is there being an active opposition party or group of individuals that can call the administration out on their failures so we can improve things and not have to endure more of this administration's horrendous prioritizing...and that's what I think is among this administration's biggest failings. It's not money, it's priorities. While Bush is busy pushing his various agenda, we're all suffering the consequences.
Macam said:
Past presidents are supposed to "rise above" politics once they leave office. It's something that has been a informal rule for years (Although it does get broken from time to time. Theodore Roosevelt being the worst offender).
Oh, by the way. The 'blame' can be spread around. But most of that will fall on the State and Local level. It's how our system works and has worked for a few centuries. We also fought a civil war over it a few years back. I know your vision of government doesn't coincide with that idea, but that is the reality.
At a time when the National Guard should have been dispatched and extraordinary Federal assistance called upon ... the LA Governor was making pleas to her citizens to (paraphrasing here) "pray the hurricane down to a category 2". That was the forward thinking initiative that was taken at a State level.
Synbios459
Banned
What I don't understand is why they couldn't have had like 100 helicopters loaded with food and stuff ready to take off right after it hit.
ToxicAdam said:
Informal rule or not, that doesn't make it right. Failing to point out obvious missteps that cost thousands of lives and billions of lives is not "rising above" politics. It's irresponsible and dishonest. The blame, again, is shared and I've never disputed that. You seem to presume that I'm throwing the entirety of the blame at the federal government's feet, but I'm not. I'm simply not blind to the fact that the federal, state, and local governments are closely knit together and that the federal government does a lot of the heavy lifting. Funding and prioritizing came from the federal level and both of those were not done appropriately. The hurricane was not a surprise; the levees breaking was to some extent, but little was done in a timely fashion with regards to the first part and even less to the second. All parties share blame, Bush and his administration included.
As for Blanco's "pray the hurricane down to a Category 2" comment....you act as if Bush himself wouldn't partake in such commentary.
- Status