> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Nick Arnett > Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 1:40 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: RFK Jr. interview > > On 7/29/06, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So, the argument that Clinton thought they had dangerous WMDs, and that > the > > European intelligence agencies thought they had WMDs is accurate. > > > Okay... but I don't think that changes the basic idea that our leaders are > responsible for what they say, no matter what party they belong to.
They are. But, they are not responsible for being clairvoyant. Clinton took the best possible analysis he could obtain, and made reasonable assumptions from it. I think that's responsible. Bush didn't, and I think that reflects his incompetence. >I don't think it changes the fact that virtually all the reasons > that people supported going into this war turned out to be wrong. > That's an enormous, very costly (unbelievably costly) mistake. Where's >the accountability for that? I've heard exactly one member of Congress >apologize to those who have lost the most -- family members. Each of us >have had thousands of our tax dollars spent. I have a question about a parallel situation. On Wednesday, Rita was forecast to hit shore southwest of Houston, with the projected path just to the west of the city. Having seen the New Orleans disaster a couple of weeks before, the mayor of Galveston ordered a mandatory evacuation. A voluntary evacuation was ordered for Houston. A horrible mess ensued. Included in that were the deaths of 20 senior citizens in a bus accident. My question is whether the mayor owes the families of those senior citizens an apology, because it would have been better if no evacuation order was given. > What's the meaning of a poll that show Democrats aren't kidding themselves > about the facts as much as Republicans? I don't think it tells me for > whom I should vote. It tells me that people are in denial. Sure, but there is also the interesting fact that only certain questions were asked. >Why do people use denial? To avoid pain, sorrow, anger and so forth. Or hard decisions. We're in denial over Social Security, for example. Most of the folks my dad's age are convinced that they got a poor deal from Social Security, when, in reality, they made off like bandits....in terms of taxes paid vs. benefits. Denying the humanness of blacks allowed Southerners to accept slavery as just. >I think this is about a failure to work through our pain and grief >about 9/11 and much more in a > healthy manner. As a nation, as a culture, we have thrown away most of > the > rituals and ceremonies that allow us to acknowledge and express our pain > and > frustration, which blocks us from taking appropriate action and > celebrating > what we do have. If that is political, so be it, but it has nothing to do > with partisanship. One good step would be to depoliticize ceremonies. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
