Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush Administration's Media Manipulation--MediaGate? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skywatcher who wrote (4892)	9/5/2005 7:55:06 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9838

Why do we always assign blame? Dennis Byrne Published September 5, 2005 . . . The ease and earnestness with which people express the knee-jerk belief that one of the most destructive and powerful forces in nature could have been defeated "if only ..." belies a troubling level of ignorance or naivete. An "average" hurricane packs the energy of hundreds of atomic bombs. Or the equivalent of a half-year's supply of energy for the U.S. To suggest that all "they" have to do to beat such a force is to build a sea wall 10 feet higher is screwy. So is the idea that all the food, water and shelter that a million refugees need can be positioned, as if overnight, within a day's ride of the destruction. Just assembling hundreds of buses, flatboats, helicopters, ice bags, hot meals and other necessities is a logistical miracle. . . . Maybe the finger-pointing comes from today's mindset that someone else always must be ready and in charge of ensuring our safety and comfort. Or from an arrogance that we can plan in advance for every imaginable catastrophe. Or maybe it is simply partisan and ideological bunk, opportunistically tossed Bush's way. This is no apologia for the many possible misjudgments and mistakes that might have been made. Rather it is a disagreement with the simplistic view that "they" can prevent or ameliorate every imaginable calamity. And if "they" don't, it's proof of someone's incompetence, greed or callousness. We can't always blame everything on someone. Sometimes the greatest talent, deepest caring and best intentions can simply be overwhelmed; it's not someone's fault. Some might call this a pessimistic view; . . . Dennis Byrne is a Chicago-area writer and consultant. E-mail: dennis@dennisbyrne.net Copyright © 2005, Chicago Tribune chicagotribune.com

To: Skywatcher who wrote (4892)	9/5/2005 10:35:04 PM
From: Joe Btfsplk	Respond to of 9838

I don't understand the knee-jerk reaction. I don't listen to Rush much nowadays, only occasionally visit newsmax. While not in your post, the left always likes to attack FOX, too. Not always, but I generally find these three sources to be vastly superior in analysis to the older (and increasingly) alternative media. wrt "RUSH (I need another pill", there were allegations that Dan Rather had a little more experience with heroin than the Dallas police incident, Why didn't the "progressives" launch an attack on him, too? Where's the beef?