At the same time that I post whatever articles I feel like posting here, as you know I encourage others to do the same. The articles posted here certainly don't all agree with my personal views, including some of the articles I post myself. I think posting articles and editorials is an interesting way to stimulate discussion, so I'm happy that you posted one as well. Why can't you source it, however? It really has no validity unless it can be determined who wrote it. I have no idea whether any of it is accurate or not, or how you can determine that it is as valid as what Maureen Dowd or Molly Ivins have said without knowing who wrote it. That makes no sense to me. When you say "the likes" of Maureen Dowd or Molly Ivins, you seem to be making a moral judgment based on their political views. However, their writings are full of specifics about this situation. Can you refute those specifics? If not, then you are simply casting aspersions, in my opinion.
Having said that, there is plenty of blame to go around for what happened on the Gulf Coast. I specifically hold Bush responsible for the general lack of leadership he showed, the long period of time it took for the federal government to respond adequately, making lousy political appointments, diluting the effectiveness of FEMA by redirecting it to the terrorism crisis and demoting its importance by taking away Cabinet level leadership and representation, his lack of sensitivity in talking about how much fun he had partying as a young man while being interviewed about the hurricane, his aggressive warmongering which not only has created more, not less terrorism but spread our troops too thin to quickly protect American cities, the funds that have been cut during his administration from programs that maintained the levees and other protections to the Gulf Coast, and all the other accurate, specific charges that have been made in the articles I posted (you might want to reread the Molly Ivins piece, because they are all there). |
