Following the "re-election" of George W. Bush to be president, the Daily Mirror in England had a cover that asked "How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB?"
With the recent indictment of Tom DeLay, questions regarding Bill Frist's questionable HCA stock sale, the continuing disaster in Iraq, and the disaster in New Orleans, one has to again wonder why so many people voted for Bush.
While his approval rating is dropping towards 40 percent, one wonders what changed the mind of the other 11 percent. Iraq was a disaster last year, the only shocking news about Tom DeLay is that he was actually indicted, there were questions about Frist and HCA before, and Bush has continually pulled resources from the states to send to Iraq, sacrificing the needs of people in America.
But none of that seemed to matter to too many voters last fall, and the Bush administration figured that out. Rather than worry about whether what they were doing was right, the administration followed their beliefs, no matter if they were based on facts or not.
Many voters followed that path. Rather than take a close look at issues, they accepted generalized statements which matched what they wanted to believe, no matter if it was accurate or not. The result was a Bush win.
So the Daily Mirror asked how could so many Americans be so dumb? Easy, the public voted beliefs rather than facts. It's great to have strongly held beliefs but if at the end of the day they are harmful then they need to be examined.
Perhaps the examination has begun.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Monday, September 26, 2005
Bushes Hit Trifecta
With the request by the Louisiana Senators for $250 billion to rebuild the state following Hurricane Katrina, George Bush joins his brothers in being involved in among the most expensive and most appalling events in recent memory.
In 1990 Neil Bush paid a $50,000 fine and was banned from banking activities for his role in taking down Silverado, which cost taxpayers $1.3 billion. As a director of a failing thrift in Denver, Bush voted to approve $100 million in what were ultimately bad loans to two of his business partners. And in voting for the loans, he failed to inform fellow board members at Silverado Savings & Loan that the loan applicants were his business partners. Over all the crisis cost the public $175 billion.
In 2000 Jeb Bush as Governor helped override the public's choice for president, allowing his brother, who prior to Florida was in second place in both the electoral and popular vote, to turn (or some say steal) a disputed vote count in a win for his brother.
In 2005 George Bush, after working to transfer needed funds from homeland programs to an ill advised war in Iraq, faces a bill of $250 billion to rebuild New Orleans. Building the levees to withstand a category 5 hurricane would have cost $2.5 billion and repairs that were denied might have been enough to keep them intact. Unfortunately the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts, federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle.
Looking back at their accomplishments in savings and loans, election theft, and a national disgrace in government reaction, George and Barbara must be so proud of their sons.
In 1990 Neil Bush paid a $50,000 fine and was banned from banking activities for his role in taking down Silverado, which cost taxpayers $1.3 billion. As a director of a failing thrift in Denver, Bush voted to approve $100 million in what were ultimately bad loans to two of his business partners. And in voting for the loans, he failed to inform fellow board members at Silverado Savings & Loan that the loan applicants were his business partners. Over all the crisis cost the public $175 billion.
In 2000 Jeb Bush as Governor helped override the public's choice for president, allowing his brother, who prior to Florida was in second place in both the electoral and popular vote, to turn (or some say steal) a disputed vote count in a win for his brother.
In 2005 George Bush, after working to transfer needed funds from homeland programs to an ill advised war in Iraq, faces a bill of $250 billion to rebuild New Orleans. Building the levees to withstand a category 5 hurricane would have cost $2.5 billion and repairs that were denied might have been enough to keep them intact. Unfortunately the spending pressures of the war in Iraq, as well as homeland security -- coming at the same time as federal tax cuts, federal dollars toward SELA dropped to a trickle.
Looking back at their accomplishments in savings and loans, election theft, and a national disgrace in government reaction, George and Barbara must be so proud of their sons.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
What Might Have Been
Looking at the lack of leadership coming out of the White House and the Republican Party and looking at the issues Sen. John Kerry promoted during his 2004 presidential campaign one can wonder what might have been.
With Iraq moving closer to civil war, the American public growing more concerned and many advocating a pullout of troops, and the British feeling pressured to withdraw troops, the need for assistance from other countries is painfully obvious.
Unfortunately the only hope for such a coalition is, as Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest put it, if the cost of failure is probably so firmly evident that maybe, just maybe, those same allies might see the wisdom of jumping in---but only if it were to become a genuine coalition that shares risks and benefits.
And as Americans see gas prices rise and the administration view drilling as a response one wonders why Kerry's support for a plan to innovate our way out of dependence didn't get more support.
Bush and Cheney said they were the party who could protect Americans and that a Kerry win would put the United States at risk of another "devastating" terrorist attack.
Instead the U.S. again has faced a disaster and early results are not looking good. As Sen. Kerry said recently at a speech at Brown University, Katrina stripped away any image of competence and exposed to all the true heart and nature of this administration.
As a President who has only been able to get support by scaring people, recent events showed that wasn't going to work anymore and Bush now has pledged to take responsibility.
As Kerry said The President finally acted on Katrina and admitted a mistake only because he was held accountable by the press, cornered by events, and compelled by the outrage of the American people, who with their own eyes could see a failure of leadership and its consequences. As they say, the first step towards recovery is to get out of denial. But don't hold your breath hoping acceptance of responsibility will become a habit for this administration.
Another administration would have acted differently. Unfortunately Americans can wonder what might have been.
With Iraq moving closer to civil war, the American public growing more concerned and many advocating a pullout of troops, and the British feeling pressured to withdraw troops, the need for assistance from other countries is painfully obvious.
Unfortunately the only hope for such a coalition is, as Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest put it, if the cost of failure is probably so firmly evident that maybe, just maybe, those same allies might see the wisdom of jumping in---but only if it were to become a genuine coalition that shares risks and benefits.
And as Americans see gas prices rise and the administration view drilling as a response one wonders why Kerry's support for a plan to innovate our way out of dependence didn't get more support.
Bush and Cheney said they were the party who could protect Americans and that a Kerry win would put the United States at risk of another "devastating" terrorist attack.
Instead the U.S. again has faced a disaster and early results are not looking good. As Sen. Kerry said recently at a speech at Brown University, Katrina stripped away any image of competence and exposed to all the true heart and nature of this administration.
As a President who has only been able to get support by scaring people, recent events showed that wasn't going to work anymore and Bush now has pledged to take responsibility.
As Kerry said The President finally acted on Katrina and admitted a mistake only because he was held accountable by the press, cornered by events, and compelled by the outrage of the American people, who with their own eyes could see a failure of leadership and its consequences. As they say, the first step towards recovery is to get out of denial. But don't hold your breath hoping acceptance of responsibility will become a habit for this administration.
Another administration would have acted differently. Unfortunately Americans can wonder what might have been.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
Looking for Leadership (in all the wrong places)
Watching the continued drop in the public's approval of "President" George Bush one has to wonder what took Americans so long to figure out that he is "all hat and no cattle," as they say in Texas.
Did a tiny majority of Americans so want to believe in Bush that they overlooked his faults and voted to give him a second chance? Or did they not want to have to admit that a mistake was made in 2000 and that someone should have stood up and said something? Or was it the unchallenged photos from New Orleans and Iraq that finally exposed the administration and that no amount of wordsmithing can overcome those images?
Whatever the cause, apparently the glow around Bush has melted away and the public isn't liking what it is seeing. At 40%, Bush's approval rating is comparable to Lyndon Johnson in Vietnam or Jimmy Carter during the hostage crisis, hardly an encouraging scenario.
At this point it appears that Bush has basically lost any Democratic support and most independent support, relying only on his hard core supporters. The questions is, when will his base start to abandon him? Or are they starting to do so.
According to a recent Zogby poll, the number of people thinking Bush is doing an excellent (or heckuva) job has dropped from 24 percent to 15 percent over the past seven months. No longer being able to survive on a minimal majority Bush may find he has to listen the public. And reason.
Did a tiny majority of Americans so want to believe in Bush that they overlooked his faults and voted to give him a second chance? Or did they not want to have to admit that a mistake was made in 2000 and that someone should have stood up and said something? Or was it the unchallenged photos from New Orleans and Iraq that finally exposed the administration and that no amount of wordsmithing can overcome those images?
Whatever the cause, apparently the glow around Bush has melted away and the public isn't liking what it is seeing. At 40%, Bush's approval rating is comparable to Lyndon Johnson in Vietnam or Jimmy Carter during the hostage crisis, hardly an encouraging scenario.
At this point it appears that Bush has basically lost any Democratic support and most independent support, relying only on his hard core supporters. The questions is, when will his base start to abandon him? Or are they starting to do so.
According to a recent Zogby poll, the number of people thinking Bush is doing an excellent (or heckuva) job has dropped from 24 percent to 15 percent over the past seven months. No longer being able to survive on a minimal majority Bush may find he has to listen the public. And reason.
Thursday, September 08, 2005
William Rehnquist and New Orleans
While it may be in poor judgment to speak ill of the dead, in reviewing the events that led up to the tragic events in New Orleans one has to take into consideration the activities of former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
For those who haven't followed the news with a magnifying glass over the past dozen years one might wonder what Rehnquist had to do with New Orleans. Actually a lot. His actions set in motion a number of events that enabled Republicans to turn a close, but apparently lost election, into a disputed election, and eventually one that Rehnquist helped determine.
With his personal choice of President in office, Rehnquist watched as the new Commander in Chief set about on a policy of that damaged the United States, and of which New Orleans may be just one chapter.
Rehnquist's actions started in 1994 when Special Prosecutor Robert Fiske indicated that he would likely end the inquiry [Whitewater] without taking any action against Clinton, Rehnquist used his authority under the Independent Counsel Act to appoint Court of Appeals Judge David Sentelle, a close associate of the extreme right-wing senator from North Carolina, Jesse Helms, and a well-known Republican Party operative, to head the three-judge panel overseeing the independent counsel. There were 11 more senior judges in line for the appointment. Sentelle's panel terminated Fiske and replaced him with Kenneth W. Starr, another longtime operative of the Republican right.
With Starr in charge he led about a reckless charade of a prosecution that was culminated by impeachment hearings, overseen by Rehnquist. The hearings may not have removed Clinton from office but they may have had enough of an impact on the country to allow Bush & Co. to steal Florida and deny Al Gore his elected position as President.
Installing Bush into the White House led to the downgrading of FEMA, which led to the disastrous early response in New Orleans. Until Clinton/Gore, FEMA head James Lee Witt revitalized the agency so much that even Bush had to praise him in during the 2000 debates.
I have to pay the administration a compliment. James Lee Witt of FEMA has done a really good job of working with governors during times of crisis, Bush said.
However, as Slate pointed out to compound the irony, FEMA was actually a poster child of Gore's reinventing government crusade.
Perhaps unhappy with good government, Bush packed FEMA with people who ran horse shows and were advance men for the White House. As a result, the predictable disastrous events happened.
One has to wonder if Rehnquist's heart gave out last week when he pieced the above together and figured out his responsibility for it all.
For those who haven't followed the news with a magnifying glass over the past dozen years one might wonder what Rehnquist had to do with New Orleans. Actually a lot. His actions set in motion a number of events that enabled Republicans to turn a close, but apparently lost election, into a disputed election, and eventually one that Rehnquist helped determine.
With his personal choice of President in office, Rehnquist watched as the new Commander in Chief set about on a policy of that damaged the United States, and of which New Orleans may be just one chapter.
Rehnquist's actions started in 1994 when Special Prosecutor Robert Fiske indicated that he would likely end the inquiry [Whitewater] without taking any action against Clinton, Rehnquist used his authority under the Independent Counsel Act to appoint Court of Appeals Judge David Sentelle, a close associate of the extreme right-wing senator from North Carolina, Jesse Helms, and a well-known Republican Party operative, to head the three-judge panel overseeing the independent counsel. There were 11 more senior judges in line for the appointment. Sentelle's panel terminated Fiske and replaced him with Kenneth W. Starr, another longtime operative of the Republican right.
With Starr in charge he led about a reckless charade of a prosecution that was culminated by impeachment hearings, overseen by Rehnquist. The hearings may not have removed Clinton from office but they may have had enough of an impact on the country to allow Bush & Co. to steal Florida and deny Al Gore his elected position as President.
Installing Bush into the White House led to the downgrading of FEMA, which led to the disastrous early response in New Orleans. Until Clinton/Gore, FEMA head James Lee Witt revitalized the agency so much that even Bush had to praise him in during the 2000 debates.
I have to pay the administration a compliment. James Lee Witt of FEMA has done a really good job of working with governors during times of crisis, Bush said.
However, as Slate pointed out to compound the irony, FEMA was actually a poster child of Gore's reinventing government crusade.
Perhaps unhappy with good government, Bush packed FEMA with people who ran horse shows and were advance men for the White House. As a result, the predictable disastrous events happened.
One has to wonder if Rehnquist's heart gave out last week when he pieced the above together and figured out his responsibility for it all.
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Some Culture of Life
For an administration that was willing to rush back to the White House in order to sign a bill to help one comatose individual from dying, the apparent lack of concern about possibly hundreds dying in New Orleans makes one wonder how serious the administration is about believing in a culture of life.
On Tuesday desperate reports started coming out of New Orleans yet many believe the administration was slow to act. In the meantime, many more people may die in New Orleans. By Thursday night the situation had degenerated into chaos.
Whether its in Iraq or New Orleans, one has to question the administration's concern for American life. Why is it OK when some die, but others deserve the full attention of the President?
What kind of culture of life is that?
On Tuesday desperate reports started coming out of New Orleans yet many believe the administration was slow to act. In the meantime, many more people may die in New Orleans. By Thursday night the situation had degenerated into chaos.
Whether its in Iraq or New Orleans, one has to question the administration's concern for American life. Why is it OK when some die, but others deserve the full attention of the President?
What kind of culture of life is that?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)