On the one hand...
In the pages of today's Washington Post, these guys don't get it:
Kurtz:
Not that anyone would wish such massive death and destruction on Louisiana and Mississippi, but [liberals] now have a rare opportunity not just to criticize George W. Bush, but to paint his response to Katrina as a metaphor for his presidency.
Balz:
...Facing a divided nation, the president has eschewed unity in both his governing strategy and his political blueprint. ...opponents argue that he has favored confrontation over conciliation with the Democrats while favoring a set of policies aimed at deepening support among his conservative base at the expense of ideas that might produce bipartisan consensus and broader approval among the voters. His allies and advisers, while acknowledging that polarization has worsened during the past five years, say the opposition party bears the brunt of responsibility. Democrats, by this reckoning, have rebuffed Bush's efforts at bipartisanship, put up a wall to ideas that once enjoyed some support on their side, and, even in the current crisis along the Gulf Coast, are seeking to score political points rather than joining hands with the president to speed the recovery and relief to the victims.
This guy does get it:
Meyerson:
The world looks on in stunned amazement, unable to understand how a once great nation has grown so indifferent not just to its poor and its blacks but even to the most rudimentary self-preservation. Some of it is institutional racism, but the primary culprit is the economic libertarianism that the president still espouses whenever he sells his Social Security snake oil. It's that libertarianism, more than anything else, that has transformed a great city into an immense morgue.
"Let's put politics aside," one hears. OK, I'm all for that. Let's make it about the people, and about competence, and about results. Strike one, two, and three. President Bubble Boy, resign.
Kurtz:
Not that anyone would wish such massive death and destruction on Louisiana and Mississippi, but [liberals] now have a rare opportunity not just to criticize George W. Bush, but to paint his response to Katrina as a metaphor for his presidency.
Balz:
...Facing a divided nation, the president has eschewed unity in both his governing strategy and his political blueprint. ...opponents argue that he has favored confrontation over conciliation with the Democrats while favoring a set of policies aimed at deepening support among his conservative base at the expense of ideas that might produce bipartisan consensus and broader approval among the voters. His allies and advisers, while acknowledging that polarization has worsened during the past five years, say the opposition party bears the brunt of responsibility. Democrats, by this reckoning, have rebuffed Bush's efforts at bipartisanship, put up a wall to ideas that once enjoyed some support on their side, and, even in the current crisis along the Gulf Coast, are seeking to score political points rather than joining hands with the president to speed the recovery and relief to the victims.
This guy does get it:
Meyerson:
The world looks on in stunned amazement, unable to understand how a once great nation has grown so indifferent not just to its poor and its blacks but even to the most rudimentary self-preservation. Some of it is institutional racism, but the primary culprit is the economic libertarianism that the president still espouses whenever he sells his Social Security snake oil. It's that libertarianism, more than anything else, that has transformed a great city into an immense morgue.
"Let's put politics aside," one hears. OK, I'm all for that. Let's make it about the people, and about competence, and about results. Strike one, two, and three. President Bubble Boy, resign.
posted by albany layman at 9/07/2005 01:38:00 PM
1 Comments:
More like a long-term lack of libertanarism. People on long-term welfare sat around waiting for the government to protect them. As ever the government failed.
The government offered reduced insurance and promised to build levees. In a free market people can afford to take responsibility and with less government would do so. The real issue is people spent their money in tax, sucked on the welfare teat or simply didn't live there (but paid tax for it all anyway) and then the government failed.
Again.
They cut funding for the levees, just before a major hurricane.
They cut funding for anti-terrorism, just before 9/11.
They ignored calls for more troops - just before the Iraqi quagmire.
Everything they touch turns rancid. Who's been held accountable for all this? no-one, you pay even more money to the failed departments while promoting those that failed. This is BETTER than the free market?
Laughable.
W.
Post a Comment
<< Home