Roscoe wrote:
> Gary,
>
> If your first response to the Foley scandal is Democratic deflection, you
> have lived in a southern Republican stronghold too long.
Well Roscoe, I will have to agree that I have lived in the South too
long, but I dislike (and pretty much always have, long before Dubya)
Republican ideology in general. The point being that my haste to judge
is probably a result of working too late, too many days in a row, and
has nothing to do with blue state/red state thing. That the republican
administration has been deplorable in its handling of any number of
things - that may enter into it as well. As a total aside, and really
the only reason I answered this 'somewhat off-topic post' is that I
find it ironic/amusing that their own agencies have deemed them
"neurotic" and published these 'findings'. Truth is, it would be very
hard for anyone (red or blue) to get through life without 'some'
measure of neurosis or personality disorder, so the whole concept is
probably just another example of academia spewing out something to
justify its continued presence. Equally funny is the republican
reaction re. 'why are we giving this 'national institute of health' any
money? (since they're trashing us..)
"All reports to come out about this Foley scandal to date have come
from Republicans."
Great.. If only they had done as good a job on the "weapons of mass
destruction" ostensibly inside the tin-pot country they decided to go
after, at expense which has now exceeded hundreds of billions of
dollars.... OH, wait, that was really a CIA intelligence problem,
wasn't it? Sorry, my bad. Did Iraq ever actually threaten to attack
or harm the United States?
"The crime here is not the revelation -
it is the act and the cover up."
Obviously.
"The outrage should be focused on those issues alone."
Well yes, I suppose it should. It's kinda hard to confine outrage
though - sometimes. Maybe even most of the time. The streets of
Baghdad (and Lebanon, and Pakistan) have illustrated some fairly
interesting examples of "non-focused" outrage. Yes, that's a bit
unfair, but I have grown tired of all this. Apparently some others
have too, I thought this was an interesting view of the economics
involved in all our mirth and mayhem. It may be a mis-representation,
I don't have time to look up all the detail, but it might be an
interesting read to have with your Starbucks...
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
"This is the same strategy the administration has used with
> every one of their scandals: attack the messengers and conduct a thorough
> investigation to find the leak. They never address their own fuck-ups."
Hard to say much back to that..
<snip>
"It is their cover-up and abuse of
power that will cost them."
Agreed. I'd only add that their inability to really govern anything
will probably figure into their "costs" as well, and I for one, will
enjoy watching that. People and animals in New Orleans were left
grossly mismanaged, while the green machine happily spends millions a
day fighting with people "to help them instill democracy" (a concept
they don't even want, and certainly should not be "free of charge" -
ours certainly wasn't/isn't)
Do you REALLY believe that this little item was released a month before
the elections, by the REPUBLICANS, just to make them a little less
poll-attractive? If Haskert knew this a year ago, you think no-one
else did? And if they did, they were ALL republican? I guess that
*could* be right, it just seems rather unlikely.
Anyway, I rarely involve myself in this sort of political punditizing
(is that a word?) but I am growing very tired of seeing things
manipulated, mishandled and the general spirit of the country made even
worse (and I thought it had nowhere to go but up - boy was I wrong
about that..)
Have you ever thought about how much public transportation 500 billion
dollars could buy?
U.S. Government study finds Conservatives are neurotic 
Linear Mode
