Sorry for my absence. Thought I would post a few small things for brain fodder.
Enjoy.
(The blogger who mantains this page would like to note that he is talking to all 5 or 6 people that actuall read this blog.)
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Selective Feminism
More things that I ponder.
I, frankly, think that Feminism is a joke. Not because I am a male, but because it is unnecessary. Back in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, it was, but now not so much. I find several aspects of it to by hypocritical. Here is an example.
Why is it that feminists fight for equality, yet have said nothing about having to register with the military? All men do, and the Government does't mess around. They will track to down. Understandably, that would force them to support something that they hate. But why?
Woman, as a population, are considered a minority. Intestingly enough, in American (and world) population there are more woman than men. Something like 51% to 49%. Small I realize, but enough to make them officially not a minority.
It's victimhood. American society, more specifically the left, has convinced minorities that they are victims. That subject, however is a whole other post of it's own. Perhaps the next one. Long it will be.
I, frankly, think that Feminism is a joke. Not because I am a male, but because it is unnecessary. Back in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, it was, but now not so much. I find several aspects of it to by hypocritical. Here is an example.
Why is it that feminists fight for equality, yet have said nothing about having to register with the military? All men do, and the Government does't mess around. They will track to down. Understandably, that would force them to support something that they hate. But why?
Woman, as a population, are considered a minority. Intestingly enough, in American (and world) population there are more woman than men. Something like 51% to 49%. Small I realize, but enough to make them officially not a minority.
It's victimhood. American society, more specifically the left, has convinced minorities that they are victims. That subject, however is a whole other post of it's own. Perhaps the next one. Long it will be.
Survey Says....Majority
The property resulting from being or relating to the greater in number of two parts; the main part; more than half of the votes.
It is interesing that this is the commonly held definition of the word "majority," yet the political left only seems to agree with it when it suits them. In the 2000 electection, Dems shouted that Gore won the popular vote (or he won the majority) and that Bush stole the election. Or a neat BS statistic that Iraq's people don't want us there, or that a greater number of people want us to leave. Here is another one. The left slanted media loves to bring up the fact the Bush's approval rating is only 37% in favor. This, of course, means that the majority of people don't agree with Bush. Ok fine.
So why is it that when the majority of America is not offended by saying Merry Christmas, or having the 10 commandments in front of a government building, is it shut down? Why is it that while people in America overwhelming vote for defining marrige as being between a man and a woman, lawsuits are being won to overturn that? All of this the left champions by the way.
Just a thought I had. Im sure someone will try to answer.
It is interesing that this is the commonly held definition of the word "majority," yet the political left only seems to agree with it when it suits them. In the 2000 electection, Dems shouted that Gore won the popular vote (or he won the majority) and that Bush stole the election. Or a neat BS statistic that Iraq's people don't want us there, or that a greater number of people want us to leave. Here is another one. The left slanted media loves to bring up the fact the Bush's approval rating is only 37% in favor. This, of course, means that the majority of people don't agree with Bush. Ok fine.
So why is it that when the majority of America is not offended by saying Merry Christmas, or having the 10 commandments in front of a government building, is it shut down? Why is it that while people in America overwhelming vote for defining marrige as being between a man and a woman, lawsuits are being won to overturn that? All of this the left champions by the way.
Just a thought I had. Im sure someone will try to answer.
Monday, October 31, 2005
Libs Make Huge Mistake...In My Opinion
Today brought, along with halloween, the nomination of a new Supreme Court Justice. Samuel Alito seems like a qualified guy as well as intellegent. His views, and rulings appearently, are fairly conservative to a point that the hard right should be satified with his nomination. The Dems missed a chance.
Harriet Meirs didn't really have a chance to show herself. I was not opposed to her and thing she would have provided a great perspective on the court. Bottom line, she was drummed out, and not just by the left alone but by the right. The left should have embraced her with a high potential for a swing vote on the court. But they jumped in with a song of not knowing much about her or that she was Bush's friend. Wrong move. This, again along with the right, backed her down and caused her withdraw. The left should have supported her simply because the right, as a whole, didn't like her or saw her as not conservative enough. They had a fantastic position. The angles they could have played on the right...Not supporting a candidate. Not hearing what she had to say. Not giving her the respect of a judicial nominee. Not supporting the process. Griding locking the nomination and hurting the american justice system and in turn hurting the american people. Oopps. That's not even close to what they did.
Where are the now? Fighting an up hill against an more extreme right candidate with no control over the voting bodies. ouch. If they filibuster (sp?), that can be voted down as well. With Miers, the approval vote could have gotten through with votes coming from both sides. Now, they can badmouth all they want, but they lost control. But hey, they made the wrong choice. And I guess if they make the right ones, or actually listened to the american people at election time, they would be in the white house...and majority in congress...and in touch with the american people.
Harriet Meirs didn't really have a chance to show herself. I was not opposed to her and thing she would have provided a great perspective on the court. Bottom line, she was drummed out, and not just by the left alone but by the right. The left should have embraced her with a high potential for a swing vote on the court. But they jumped in with a song of not knowing much about her or that she was Bush's friend. Wrong move. This, again along with the right, backed her down and caused her withdraw. The left should have supported her simply because the right, as a whole, didn't like her or saw her as not conservative enough. They had a fantastic position. The angles they could have played on the right...Not supporting a candidate. Not hearing what she had to say. Not giving her the respect of a judicial nominee. Not supporting the process. Griding locking the nomination and hurting the american justice system and in turn hurting the american people. Oopps. That's not even close to what they did.
Where are the now? Fighting an up hill against an more extreme right candidate with no control over the voting bodies. ouch. If they filibuster (sp?), that can be voted down as well. With Miers, the approval vote could have gotten through with votes coming from both sides. Now, they can badmouth all they want, but they lost control. But hey, they made the wrong choice. And I guess if they make the right ones, or actually listened to the american people at election time, they would be in the white house...and majority in congress...and in touch with the american people.
Monday, October 17, 2005
My Style
I think I need to put a little more flow into my posts. I have so much to say, I can't seem to get it out. After reading some of my posts, I find that I jump around and just made statement after statement. That's fine, because I type the way I talk, but voice inflection, pause, and hand gestures just don't come out in text. While I have proof to back up my arguements, I just don't think I present it correctly. Meaning, I don't complete a full thought. My brain just goes on to the next point I want to make or the next thing I want to say and I just start typing. I don't know. However it makes for great debate. It's hard to explain. Maybe it a good thing because it sparks debate. What do you think?
Sunday, October 16, 2005
The Race In 2008
The scary thing is it might just happen. Im serious. H. R. Clinton is probably going to be the Democrate's Candidate in 2008. I know, I know, I know. Everybody has already been saying it. But it frightens me. Why you may ask? Well that is what the blog is for.
She...Im having trouble...might win. And let me head this off. I am not opposed to the idea because she is a woman. It is mainly because of who she is. She is a wolf in sheeps clothing. She is willing to be whoever the American public wants her to be to get elected, but will disregard all of that if elected. She is already starting to try to change her image by talking tough on illegal immigration. She is aligning herself with faith based organizations. All of this while doing nothing about the borders and favoring abortion. I bring abortion up only to show her true side regardless of what she is trying to portray. I have no intention of discussing the issue, mainly because I think it has diluted politics for decades ever since Roe V. Wade (interestingly enough Wade was an alias to protect the identity of the women in the case who eventually changed her position on abortion. A fact picked up in a wonderful book Freakanomics recommended to me by my buddy at the blog Unlimited Hell).
You are probably thinking, "all polititians do that, change their image to pander to a particular voting bucket." To some extent you are right, but lying or manuvering around your core values is not. So why might she win? Two reasons. One she is a woman. Again, not a problem. But being a "minority" wins big points in elections, especially if you are trying to walk on ground no one has been before. The second is Bill "The First Gentlemen" Clinton. Carisma-a-go-go. That is a political one two punch.
A friend, who posts on this site and shall remain nameless but rhymes with Ess, and I were discussing this very topic. And what I am about to say, which is not really earth shattering, would be a great bout. Condlezza Rice VS Hillary Clinton. Condi would have her. Not only is she a woman, but black as well. Maybe the black population will stop believing the Dems who they wrongfully attact themselves to. That may be the next post, How the Democratic Party keeps the black population believing they are victims and must rely on the governement. Condi is strong, she is a foreign affairs expert, she is extremely intellectual, and has a cheerfull presence.
Please take no offense. Understand the issues are very important, and their physical attributes are not all that I see. But I am looking at it from a voter block standpoint, rather simplistic but extremely important. I have to agree with some that this country may be ready for a woman president. Heck, Hollywood (not in any way liberal and probably wouldn't support Hillary...sarcasm is cool) is already preparing the nation for that very thing with that new show Commander and Chief. (Sidebar, Donald Sutherland plays an evil Republican. Hmmm. Media bias. Not Hollywood.)
The true problem lies in the fact that the Republicans have no solid opposition to Hillary. McCain. Hell of a guy, but too middle of the road. Rudolph Giuliani, the man who kicked the mob out of New York and toughed out 911. Maybe, but still if you are talking true conservative, too middle of the road. There are others, but none that truely stand out. We will have to just sit and wait I guess.
It's late. There may be spelling and grammer mistakes. Im tired. Chime in.
She...Im having trouble...might win. And let me head this off. I am not opposed to the idea because she is a woman. It is mainly because of who she is. She is a wolf in sheeps clothing. She is willing to be whoever the American public wants her to be to get elected, but will disregard all of that if elected. She is already starting to try to change her image by talking tough on illegal immigration. She is aligning herself with faith based organizations. All of this while doing nothing about the borders and favoring abortion. I bring abortion up only to show her true side regardless of what she is trying to portray. I have no intention of discussing the issue, mainly because I think it has diluted politics for decades ever since Roe V. Wade (interestingly enough Wade was an alias to protect the identity of the women in the case who eventually changed her position on abortion. A fact picked up in a wonderful book Freakanomics recommended to me by my buddy at the blog Unlimited Hell).
You are probably thinking, "all polititians do that, change their image to pander to a particular voting bucket." To some extent you are right, but lying or manuvering around your core values is not. So why might she win? Two reasons. One she is a woman. Again, not a problem. But being a "minority" wins big points in elections, especially if you are trying to walk on ground no one has been before. The second is Bill "The First Gentlemen" Clinton. Carisma-a-go-go. That is a political one two punch.
A friend, who posts on this site and shall remain nameless but rhymes with Ess, and I were discussing this very topic. And what I am about to say, which is not really earth shattering, would be a great bout. Condlezza Rice VS Hillary Clinton. Condi would have her. Not only is she a woman, but black as well. Maybe the black population will stop believing the Dems who they wrongfully attact themselves to. That may be the next post, How the Democratic Party keeps the black population believing they are victims and must rely on the governement. Condi is strong, she is a foreign affairs expert, she is extremely intellectual, and has a cheerfull presence.
Please take no offense. Understand the issues are very important, and their physical attributes are not all that I see. But I am looking at it from a voter block standpoint, rather simplistic but extremely important. I have to agree with some that this country may be ready for a woman president. Heck, Hollywood (not in any way liberal and probably wouldn't support Hillary...sarcasm is cool) is already preparing the nation for that very thing with that new show Commander and Chief. (Sidebar, Donald Sutherland plays an evil Republican. Hmmm. Media bias. Not Hollywood.)
The true problem lies in the fact that the Republicans have no solid opposition to Hillary. McCain. Hell of a guy, but too middle of the road. Rudolph Giuliani, the man who kicked the mob out of New York and toughed out 911. Maybe, but still if you are talking true conservative, too middle of the road. There are others, but none that truely stand out. We will have to just sit and wait I guess.
It's late. There may be spelling and grammer mistakes. Im tired. Chime in.
House Cleaning
Let me appologize for not posting in a while. I have been enjoying my days off of late. (Kings English sorry) Have added a few new sites to the "Links" column.
One, newbuster.org, is a fantastic site. The guys are hound dogs when it comes to finding a different perspective on the news.
The other, www.veerministries.org, was created by a stand-up guy whom I met through work. Check out what he has to offer, which is everything from intellect to music producing expertise. I think there may be a few Easter Eggs on his site as well.
Now to the meat and bones of issues. Check the next post.
One, newbuster.org, is a fantastic site. The guys are hound dogs when it comes to finding a different perspective on the news.
The other, www.veerministries.org, was created by a stand-up guy whom I met through work. Check out what he has to offer, which is everything from intellect to music producing expertise. I think there may be a few Easter Eggs on his site as well.
Now to the meat and bones of issues. Check the next post.
Sunday, October 02, 2005
Blanket Statements
Honestly, it is but it isn't. The Democratic Party is so out of touch with America it isn't even funny. Well...It is sometimes. But I think they struggle to find an image. Why? Because they align themselves with the wrong people. Objection your honor...Asked and answered.
No seriously. Let me give you an example (for the one maybe two probably zero people actually reading this). Take Cindy Sheehan. As you know, she wanted to talk to Bush and camped out in front of his ranch. It was her way of grieving. Fine. But look at what it has turned into. She is now supported by Moveon.org and Michael Moore just to name a few. But her message has changed. It's now hate Bush this and hate Bush that. That wasn't her original point. She was then in the peace rally in DC, which ties in somewhat, preaching. She even made an announcement, "will (name I have forgot) please meet your folks at the Social Liberation booth...will..."
Honestly, I think it's a little unfair to her. She is being used. But she is being used by the Hate Bush "movement" who will do anything to deface him. That being said, here is the problem. These same groups, and the same people are being melted into the Democratic Party. And the party is not shunning it, but condoning it and embracing it with open arms. This really stuns me, because I know several Dems who are simply not like this so the blanket doesn't cover them. But the party in general is afflicted with the disease. The Democrats, in general, don't just disagree with Bush, they hate him.
Hey I didn't hate Clinton. I disagreed with him, but I considered him a bright, extremely smart, charismatic guy who did some (some) good things. I bet most Dems won't say that about Regan and none would say it about Bush. But it's a little give a take. Bottom line, they need to find out who they are. They need Dean to flip out or hand out a flyer or something. Hilary may do it. That will be my next topic.
No seriously. Let me give you an example (for the one maybe two probably zero people actually reading this). Take Cindy Sheehan. As you know, she wanted to talk to Bush and camped out in front of his ranch. It was her way of grieving. Fine. But look at what it has turned into. She is now supported by Moveon.org and Michael Moore just to name a few. But her message has changed. It's now hate Bush this and hate Bush that. That wasn't her original point. She was then in the peace rally in DC, which ties in somewhat, preaching. She even made an announcement, "will (name I have forgot) please meet your folks at the Social Liberation booth...will..."
Honestly, I think it's a little unfair to her. She is being used. But she is being used by the Hate Bush "movement" who will do anything to deface him. That being said, here is the problem. These same groups, and the same people are being melted into the Democratic Party. And the party is not shunning it, but condoning it and embracing it with open arms. This really stuns me, because I know several Dems who are simply not like this so the blanket doesn't cover them. But the party in general is afflicted with the disease. The Democrats, in general, don't just disagree with Bush, they hate him.
Hey I didn't hate Clinton. I disagreed with him, but I considered him a bright, extremely smart, charismatic guy who did some (some) good things. I bet most Dems won't say that about Regan and none would say it about Bush. But it's a little give a take. Bottom line, they need to find out who they are. They need Dean to flip out or hand out a flyer or something. Hilary may do it. That will be my next topic.
Saturday, October 01, 2005
Our Kanye West Video
I have given it a link on the sidebar for easier finding as the original post moves down.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
My Thoughts on the Kanye West Situation
Ok. So...My sister and I were talking about this whole thing. I think this video she created will explain things. Enjoy it. The credit goes to my sister though.
Use this link:
The Other Kayne West Video.
Then click on The Video.
Use this link:
The Other Kayne West Video.
Then click on The Video.
Friday, September 23, 2005
Final Thought on Katrina Then Im Done
Can I get a "Man Up?" Bush did the right thing taking resposibility for the situation in the gulf. But let's be certain, he is taking responsibility for the supposed short comings of FEMA. Ok, Ok, Ok. They screwed up some things, however I still think that we need to look locally. In my humble opinion, the mayor needs a look. I think that his unthought out plan to get as many people back into New Orleans as possible with another massive storm heading in their direction is a tell sign that he really doesn't know what he is doing. Could it be an indicator of what was going on behind the scenes when Katrina was about to make land? I think so.
I heard an interesting phone call/interview yesterday that puts a new spin on the "hating and leaving behind of black people in New Orleans." It was from a guy from St. Bernards parish just outside of New Orleans. The area is mainly white. The majority of them where not rescued. I fact crews were rescuing animals in the city before the saw any help. Now why don't we see that in the press. All we see in the press is the faces of black being used as victims. Leave it to the press to be one sided. Honestly, it has more to do with poverty than anything else and we could go into my views on that. But this article pretty much says what I would say.
This is a great editorial and interestingly its written by a black man: Post Dispatch Editorial.
I will have a Roberts update soon.
I heard an interesting phone call/interview yesterday that puts a new spin on the "hating and leaving behind of black people in New Orleans." It was from a guy from St. Bernards parish just outside of New Orleans. The area is mainly white. The majority of them where not rescued. I fact crews were rescuing animals in the city before the saw any help. Now why don't we see that in the press. All we see in the press is the faces of black being used as victims. Leave it to the press to be one sided. Honestly, it has more to do with poverty than anything else and we could go into my views on that. But this article pretty much says what I would say.
This is a great editorial and interestingly its written by a black man: Post Dispatch Editorial.
I will have a Roberts update soon.
Must Be Moving Up
I must be moving up in the world. I got my first spammer promising a quick and easy way to make money. I wonder if it is true. Spammers should be shot.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Book Report and North Korean
Was down at Blackriver Lodge over the weekend and had plenty of time to read. The UN Gang by Pedro A. Sanjuan was my choice. Rather interesting book. Pedro was at the UN Secretariat as an ambassador in the 80s and early 90s. KGB, drug deals in the parking garage, anti-semitism, and the absolute uselessness of the UN. Though there is some repetitiveness of phrase and over reiteration of facts, it still is an interesting read. I just ordered a book called ACLU vs. America: Exposing the Agenda to Redifine Moral Values. Should be fun. In the meantime I thought I would shift gears and read Jim Cramer's Real Money.
Just a quick note, North Korean is still building and developing nukes regardless of what they say. The duped the Clinton Administration and still got paid off with american tax dollars. Why would they stop now? Bilateral talks don't work without costing us huge amounts of bounty, and multilateral talks are strickly posturing. But hey, progress is progress.
Just a quick note, North Korean is still building and developing nukes regardless of what they say. The duped the Clinton Administration and still got paid off with american tax dollars. Why would they stop now? Bilateral talks don't work without costing us huge amounts of bounty, and multilateral talks are strickly posturing. But hey, progress is progress.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
The Press Presses for Nothing
Did I mention that I dislike the press. Aside from the fact that the majorirty are on the left, all of them have to make mountians out of mole hills. Yesterday, that would be Monday, when I got home from work I watched 4 seperate news channels taking it to a new level. The topic was the Los Angeles Blackout which lasted for a total of about 2.5 to 3 hours. You would have thought that we were under attack by a Soviet ICBM. They had city planers, governors from other states, ex LAPD, ex Fire Department, Current Fire Department, energy specialists, spokes people from various city agencies, circus clows, PGA Pros...you get the idea.
Now this blackout was during the day at around 1:00 pacific, and they knew why it happened. It was in fact a safety precaution to protect the grid from damage caused by spikes and was done intentionally. But we had live helicopter shots and special report coverage. It wasn't long before someone brought the possibility that it was a terrorist attack (because of the threat over the weekend) even though within 20 mins of the blackout, we knew what the problem was.
This entire situation should have been a scroll on the bottom of the screen with updates occationally. But it was in your face until the horse was dead from a severe beating. Every single "specialist" that came on said, "You know this isn't that big of a deal. Really. It's just a backout during the day and will be resolved shortly." One after another, yet coverage continued. The only drama the press were able to whip up as they ignored the possibility they needed to move on to something else was that there were people stuck in a few elevators. Literally a handfull.
I can only assume that some of you are thinking, "Hey...that's the press. That's what they are supposed to do. Get over it." You're wrong. The press is supposed to inform us, not present a posture that we are quickly approaching armageddon. I mean, raise your hand if you have been in a blackout during the day. It's no big deal, happens all the time and isn't bad because there is still light for christ's sake. I challenge the press to actually report the news, instead of follow a political agenda or continue coverage with total specualation on information that is nothing and never really will be.
Now this blackout was during the day at around 1:00 pacific, and they knew why it happened. It was in fact a safety precaution to protect the grid from damage caused by spikes and was done intentionally. But we had live helicopter shots and special report coverage. It wasn't long before someone brought the possibility that it was a terrorist attack (because of the threat over the weekend) even though within 20 mins of the blackout, we knew what the problem was.
This entire situation should have been a scroll on the bottom of the screen with updates occationally. But it was in your face until the horse was dead from a severe beating. Every single "specialist" that came on said, "You know this isn't that big of a deal. Really. It's just a backout during the day and will be resolved shortly." One after another, yet coverage continued. The only drama the press were able to whip up as they ignored the possibility they needed to move on to something else was that there were people stuck in a few elevators. Literally a handfull.
I can only assume that some of you are thinking, "Hey...that's the press. That's what they are supposed to do. Get over it." You're wrong. The press is supposed to inform us, not present a posture that we are quickly approaching armageddon. I mean, raise your hand if you have been in a blackout during the day. It's no big deal, happens all the time and isn't bad because there is still light for christ's sake. I challenge the press to actually report the news, instead of follow a political agenda or continue coverage with total specualation on information that is nothing and never really will be.
Thursday, September 08, 2005
Opening My Mouth and The Blame Game
Lock and load. The first post. I was trying to think of something monumental to kick this off, however my delutions of grandure quickly subsided when I realized that I am really doing this for myself. I have so many thoughts and ideas in my head that I just want to shout them at the top of my lungs. I will resist the urge however and just jump in head first.
Why are we jockeying to take a political stand already? The media, whom by the way I despise but will give some ups for the coverage of Katrina, are thirsty for a place to point a finger. Why? You could say it's because most of the media are just looking for a story. When you add to the mix the left and Democrats with people like Ted 'I Drink Therefor I Am" Kennedy, with a dash of Bill "The Turncoats Are Coming" Frist, you get political manuveuring not seen since the Red Scare. For those playing at home, it's called The Blame Game. One guess, where it's heading...The White House.
For Christ's sake, I heard Cindy Sheehan say that the actual hurricane was Bush's fault as if he ran around in circles in the middle of the Atlantic to create the vortex and then steared it toward the Gulf Coast. It was my understanding that she was greaving for her son. Guess not. I could say more but will again restrain myself. Don't even get me started on Kanye West. But we are still finding bodies and moving an entire population. Let's get the kids in schools. Let's start repairing the damage. Let's drain the city. Let's reconnect people with their families. If something went wrong, we'll figure it out later. But not now. Not when the death count is rising every day.
The celebrities, the press, the Dems, and the outright Libs will blame Bush anyway. They can think of almost nothing else but hating him. However, the majority of America doesn't seem to agree according to the recent poll. Only thirteen percent. Eat your heart out George Soros. But you probably won't hear that anywhere else but the Fox News Channel. And to claims that funding has been cut by Bush and that was why the leeves where only built to withstand a category 3 storm. Guess what kids, even if the funding was there, making the leeves strong would not even be close to being completed when Katrina hit. It would not have made a difference. It was as good as it was going to get. Now I'm not an expert on leeves, but Lt. Gen. Carl Stock, head of the Army Corps of Engineers, is. So take his word for it.
On the subject of FEMA... It has got some issues, however I don't think that they are totally to blame either. But again, let's not try to fix the car while it is in motion. Christ. What a brilliant idea!! Let's bash and underappreciate the people who probably haven't slept more than 10 hours in the past week because they have been dealing with this but make sure they continue to do their job. That causes nothing but more problems. That is one thing we don't need more of...problems and bureaucracy.
Why are we jockeying to take a political stand already? The media, whom by the way I despise but will give some ups for the coverage of Katrina, are thirsty for a place to point a finger. Why? You could say it's because most of the media are just looking for a story. When you add to the mix the left and Democrats with people like Ted 'I Drink Therefor I Am" Kennedy, with a dash of Bill "The Turncoats Are Coming" Frist, you get political manuveuring not seen since the Red Scare. For those playing at home, it's called The Blame Game. One guess, where it's heading...The White House.
For Christ's sake, I heard Cindy Sheehan say that the actual hurricane was Bush's fault as if he ran around in circles in the middle of the Atlantic to create the vortex and then steared it toward the Gulf Coast. It was my understanding that she was greaving for her son. Guess not. I could say more but will again restrain myself. Don't even get me started on Kanye West. But we are still finding bodies and moving an entire population. Let's get the kids in schools. Let's start repairing the damage. Let's drain the city. Let's reconnect people with their families. If something went wrong, we'll figure it out later. But not now. Not when the death count is rising every day.
The celebrities, the press, the Dems, and the outright Libs will blame Bush anyway. They can think of almost nothing else but hating him. However, the majority of America doesn't seem to agree according to the recent poll. Only thirteen percent. Eat your heart out George Soros. But you probably won't hear that anywhere else but the Fox News Channel. And to claims that funding has been cut by Bush and that was why the leeves where only built to withstand a category 3 storm. Guess what kids, even if the funding was there, making the leeves strong would not even be close to being completed when Katrina hit. It would not have made a difference. It was as good as it was going to get. Now I'm not an expert on leeves, but Lt. Gen. Carl Stock, head of the Army Corps of Engineers, is. So take his word for it.
On the subject of FEMA... It has got some issues, however I don't think that they are totally to blame either. But again, let's not try to fix the car while it is in motion. Christ. What a brilliant idea!! Let's bash and underappreciate the people who probably haven't slept more than 10 hours in the past week because they have been dealing with this but make sure they continue to do their job. That causes nothing but more problems. That is one thing we don't need more of...problems and bureaucracy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)