On Sun, 2005-09-11 at 18:22 -0600, Lowell C. Savage wrote: > Frank Gilliland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <snip> > > >In the current situation, there is no hard evidence that Kathleen Blanco > > has > > >prevented the federal government from doing anything. > > > > No kidding. > > Of course, there's also no "hard evidence" that Bush slow-rolled anything.
In this case, the lack of required documentation is quite persuasive. > > > But there are some > > >good indications. > > > > No, there are just speculations. > > No. Good indications. Like Nagin's hearsay testimony that she was refusing > to authorize aid from Bush. (Since it is hearsay, it isn't evidence, but it > is an indication and it certainly is NOT "speculation." The relationship between these two (Nagin and Blanco) is tenuous at best since he publicly backed her (Republican) opponent last time. So if the evidence from him were tallied I'd suppose it to be less credible. Then again, she openly countered him on his mandatory evacuation. That isn't hearsay. If she will openly oppose the efforts of the Mayor to get his citizens out of the flooded nasty ass waters, what else will she do in this regard? > > > There is also some pretty strong testimony from the Red > > >Cross and the Salvation Army that the Blanco administration has blocked > > >delivery of aid to the Superdome and Convention Center. > > > > > > Gee, now why didn't I see it that way before? You're absolutely right; > > that single incident vindicates Bush from any responsibility for the > > pathetically slow response of FEMA and the US military, and imposes > > blame for the entire disaster in -all three states- on the Democratic > > leadership of Louisiana. I really should have read between the lines > > of that Red Cross FAQ..... NOT! > > No. I don't consider it "vindication" of Bush (although it is pretty > close). But it would be of consistent with a refusal of federal assistance. > The issue at hand is the cause of the slow response by the feds to a > disaster. If the governor is refusing aid from charitable organizations > (for whatever stated reason), and there are other indications that the > governor has refused aid from the federal government (at least for a time), > then the balance of the evidence points to the governor. True. > > > This disaster was a situation which required some difficult decisions > > to be made, and it's clear that both Nagin -and- Blanco made many of > > them. I'm sure that some of those decisions were wrong, but I highly > > doubt that they intentionally let their own constituents -- most of > > which were their political base -- suffer and die for political gains. > > But you'd suspect the same of Bush? Of course he would. Like any "good" Democrat partisan, he has to label it Bush's fault. > > > It makes me sick to see people trying to use this horrendous disaster > > as a political tool. Such people rank right up there with the looters > > and scammers that are trying to turn a profit off of the suffering of > > other people. I can't prevent people like you from spinning the facts > > and fabricating lies, but I can certainly discredit you, which I did. > > Actually. All I was doing was pointing out some facts missing from the > stories being flogged by people who were trying to "use this horrendous > disaster as a political tool." You didn't seem to be too "sick" to see > Bush's opponents doing it--in fact, you were joining right in. Gleefully it would seem. > > BTW, after reading Bill's sophmoric legalese and fundamentally warped > > interpretation of law, it might be fun to take both of you out of the > > killfile in a few months, after many of the facts have been fully > > disclosed, to rub your faces in your own propoganda. > > We'll see. Betcha we ain't really in a killfile. Betcha he's just reading, getting pissed, and moving along. This will just be his excuse to reply to only the things he can't stand to let go by and not back up his assertions. After all, he puts the useless NOSPAM text in his email address thinking it will save him from getting spam. ;) As if spammer bots don't automatically strip that sequence of letters from email addresses. > > In the meantime, > > > > =<plonk>= > > Whatever. Heh, now all he needs to do is plonk Dave and he's ignoring about 90% of the posts on this feed. Kinda eliminates any useful reason to be here. Unless of course he only signed up because he thought he could blindly attack people and feel welcome. So Dave, how long before he plonks you? ;) We'll be honored when you join us. :D Cheers, Bill _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
