[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <43A72934.4030200@sdf.lonestar.org>
Date: Mon Dec 19 21:42:34 2005
From: bkfsec at sdf.lonestar.org (bkfsec)
Subject: [Clips] A small
editorial aboutrecentevents.(fwd)
Jamie C. Pole wrote:
> And by the way, I believe that President Bush should have militarized
> New Orleans when the mayor ignored the signs that the hurricane was
> going to strike his city. The mandatory evacuation should have been
> enforced by the military, and quite a few less people would have died.
>
> And had he done that, the liberals would very likely now be asking
> whether or not it was legal for him to have done so. For the people
> that hate President Bush, nothing he does or does not do will be
> acceptable. It's as simple as that.
>
To start with, I recall having an argument about this immediately after
the hurricane fiasco was over. The situation was similar... myself
versus an apologist whose only goal was to block for the
administration. My argument was that all groups should bare some of the
blame, since they all failed.
He cited the same argument that you did. The problem is that the
argument is total and complete bullshit. Anyone with access to the
timeline of events as reported in the news can tell you it's bullshit.
This one person stated that an evacuation was never called prior to the
hurricane, and time was not allowed for the evacuation. He was wrong.
You are wrong.
Yes, the state and city made mistakes, but the bulk of the mistakes were
on the part of the feds. There's documentation on this. The only
people actively disputing this are on right wing radio talk shows.
And finally, you've been far too partisan in this discussion for your
opinion to be trustworthy. You keep saying "the whiny liberals" this
and "the whiny liberals" that... why should anyone be swayed by a person
who would preface their arguments in such an assinine way?
-bkfsec
Powered by blists - more mailing lists